Alternative Provision at a Crossroads: What the New DfE Standards Mean

Alternative provision (AP) is one of the most creative and human parts of our education system. It steps in when mainstream classrooms can’t, offering flexible, relationship-based support to children with SEND, SEMH, anxiety, or those at risk of exclusion.

But with creativity has come inconsistency. For years, non-school (unregistered) AP has operated without a national framework. Some areas have developed strong local quality checks, while others have relied heavily on trust and patchwork oversight.

That is about to change.

The New Voluntary Standards

At the end of August 2025, the Department for Education published non-statutory national standards for non-school alternative provision. For now, they’re voluntary but the DfE has made clear they will become mandatory once parliamentary time allows.

The standards are designed to:

• Set consistent expectations across a diverse sector.
  Support commissioners (schools, LAs) in choosing and monitoring provision.
• Reassure families that placements are safe and purposeful.
• Help providers self-evaluate and demonstrate quality.
  

Useful Highlights for Providers

The standards are built around four key pillars:

1. Safeguarding & Welfare
   • Enhanced DBS checks for all staff.
     Written policies on child protection, behaviour, and staff conduct.
   • A named safeguarding lead in every setting.
   • Clear processes for referrals and secure access to sites.
     
2. Health & Safety
   • Risk assessments for sites, activities, and individual children.
   • Qualified first aiders and stocked kits.
   • Incident reporting systems.
   • Fire safety policy, evacuation plans, and regular drills.
     
3. Admissions, Support & Guidance
   • Transparent, non-discriminatory admissions policies.
   • Full records of children’s needs (EHC plans, healthcare plans, exclusions).
   • A clear induction process with baseline assessments and individual learning plans.
   • Session-by-session attendance tracking and prompt follow-up of absences.
   • Behaviour strategies shared with commissioners and families.
     
4. Quality of Education
   • Staff with relevant knowledge and skills (not necessarily QTS).
   • Written curriculum plans, adapted for SEND needs.
   • Progress targets reviewed every six weeks.
   • Providers are expected to self-evaluate and act on feedback.
     

Time Limits on Placements

Alongside the standards, the DfE is pushing ahead with time-limiting placements in unregistered AP.      The message is clear: AP should be a short-term intervention, not a permanent home.

Exceptions may be allowed where children need longer-term placements, but schools and local authorities will be expected to show evidence for why.   Commissioners will carry sharper responsibility for oversight and reintegration planning.

Why This Matters

For providers:
The standards offer legitimacy and a framework for improvement, but compliance may add pressure-especially on smaller, grassroots APs that families often trust most.

For commissioners:
Responsibility is sharpened. Schools and councils must not only find provision, but prove it is safe, suitable, and effective.

For families:
Safeguards bring reassurance-better oversight, clearer expectations. But rigid time limits risk destabilising children who thrive in longer-term AP.

The SEND Dilemma

Children with SEND and SEMH rarely progress in a straight line. Building trust takes time. Forcing capped placements risks disrupting support just as it starts to work.

Flexibility must be built into these reforms or the learners who most need AP may be those most harmed by it.

A Call for Community-Led Solutions

At Anthill, we believe this is more than a compliance exercise. It’s a chance to co-create the future of AP with those who know it best-providers, families, and local authorities working together.

• Local frameworks: Build quality registers around DfE standards but rooted in community values.
• Flexibility: Advocate for time limits that bend when children’s needs demand it.
• Transparency: Use the standards to show parents what good AP looks like.
• Stories: Share the lived experiences of learners to shape not just policy, but perception.
  

Looking Forward

The DfE’s voluntary standards bring structure, consistency, and much-needed oversight. The time limits bring challenge and debate. The question is whether we let these reforms become boxes to tick or foundations to build from.

Alternative provision should never be education’s afterthought. Done well, it is where children rediscover confidence, belonging, and possibility.

The success of these reforms won’t be measured by compliance, but by whether children feel safer, more supported, and more hopeful. If we keep that truth at the centre, we can shape AP not as a holding space, but as a place where futures are rebuilt.