It should come as no surprise that interest in internal alternative provision (IAP) is gaining momentum. What is surprising is how long it has taken us to get here.
An exploratory study published by the DfE at the end of January refers to a School and College Panel Survey from June 2023 that revealed that 12% of secondary schools and 4% of primary schools have an IAP, while 9% of secondary schools and 3% of primary schools were planning to open one. Even within this small-scale study of ten mainstream secondary schools, the research highlights a wide variety of uses and approaches. Within the key findings, the authors identify two factors for success: the importance of recruiting staff with the right skills – particularly expertise in SEND and behaviour support – and the significance of pupil-staff relationships. However, as they acknowledge, this research does not provide a clear definition of what best practice looks like.
Suspensions and exclusions have reached record levels, and while absence showed slight improvement in the autumn term, it remains a chronic issue. Current strategies to reduce both absence and exclusion are clearly falling short and the financial cost of external placements, whether respite or long-term, is becoming unsustainable. A 2018 AP market analysis showed that average costs per student ranged from £17,600 for PRUs to £20,400 for independent AP placements. Although internal AP is also a significant financial commitment, in a time of tight budgets and uncertain impact, it’s easy to see why schools are exploring in-house solutions.
However, establishing effective internal alternative provision can be daunting. Schools face considerable obstacles, particularly due to the lack of codified standards and evidence-based practices. From my own experience, I know this is no simple task. I didn’t want our provision to be merely a temporary reprieve from suspension but defining its purpose and structure was a significant challenge. In many ways, I was running a school within a school: a distinct provision serving a separate function, yet one that needed to be integrated to some degree to ensure students could successfully transition back into mainstream classes.
Fortunately, at that time, The Difference was developing a framework for developing IAP, which they later shared with attendees at their first symposium in June 2024. Three key takeaways for me were:
-
It’s essential to clearly define, safeguard, and uphold the purpose, access criteria, and boundaries of your provision.
-
If students referred to IAP were to feel like valued members of the school community and be successfully reintegrated, all staff had to be involved in the process.
-
The space (its location, layout, and appearance) sends a message not just to IAP students, but to all students and staff, influencing whole-school inclusion either positively or negatively.
The good news is that schools already have – or have access to – the fundamental skills and resources needed for effective internal provision. The core challenge for schools introducing or refining their IAP lies in implementing a carefully coordinated approach to allocating and managing these assets and ensuring ongoing professional development for all staff. Many school leaders, like I once was, are still working to decode this. As with many challenges we face in our sector, the answers exist – they just need to be shared.
To address this, The Difference has launched a network bringing together school leaders to explore strategic and operational approaches to setting up, managing, and improving IAP. The stakes are high – no school leader wants to create a provision that becomes little more than a costly, short-term holding space before further suspension or permanent exclusion.
This is why the growing interest in internal alternative provision is exciting. With careful planning, adequate resources, and a whole-school commitment to inclusive practices, IAP offers a promising path to supporting our most vulnerable students while strengthening the wider school community.
At the first IAP Network meeting in December, discussions focused on:
• Curriculum design and timetabling
• Using IAP to build long-term resilience
• Group dynamics
• Post-placement support
• Staffing and professional development
These themes will be explored in greater depth at the next symposium in April. The first symposium, held in summer 2024, brought together 100 school leaders. Since then, the network has nearly doubled in size – thanks largely to word-of-mouth recommendations from members.
Being part of this national network- the first of its kind – offers a unique opportunity to tackle this challenge head-on by collaborating with other school leaders who have faced similar struggles. Together, we aim to establish a robust evidence base that will inspire and guide future practitioners.
Oludolapo Irene Ogunseitan, Programme and Communications Lead @ The Difference
The Difference is hosting the IAP Network for primary, secondary and MAT/LA leaders to explore challenges and share solutions. Contact Mohamed Abdallah, Head of The Inclusive Leadership Course to find out more mohamed@the-difference.com.