Improvements in college resources; and • Increased knowledge of issues pertaining to disabilities and measures that can help overcome these. • Some consultees noted that the FSD was having limited impact for some groups, for example those with mental health illness as their needs are less clear and possibly more complex, and that such needs may be different than those the FSD was originally set up to address. 5.2.5 Other Services Staff interviewed at site visits referred to additional supports provided by their institution for students with a disability. These included: physical resources; interactive social activities specifically designed for students with ASD; workshops in relation to student welfare and student finance (not exclusive to students with a disability); specialised progression support services; health and welfare assistance; physical alterations to buildings where necessary; and timetabling accommodations. Staff in colleges under the auspices of DDLETB highlighted very limited levels of resource available in their organisations. 5.2.6 Looking Ahead Staff reported that the needs assessments on entry to higher education and communication with the HEA worked well however they also highlighted a number of areas for improvement in relation to: Additional funding • Additional resources in colleges to support accessing FSD both operational and management level; • – Level of funding/support available through FSD relative to time spent accessing this process is • disproportionate scope to simplify process? – Extending the FSD to other students (e.g. part-time students and other categories in FE) or those with • a general learning disability); General learning disability not felt to be sufficiently catered for; • – Mainstreaming and funding for innovation it was suggested that more supports could be • – mainstreamed and annual funding should be provided for innovation in the support for students at a national level; Equipment a process to sell or donate equipment or guidance on equipment funded by the FSD at • – the end of a time in education would be beneficial; student’s Staff training - beneficial if FSD funding could be provided for staff training to raise awareness of • the range of disabilities and how they could support students; also awareness raising for students. Timescales/timing should be 3/4 opportunities for submission each year (i.e. greater flexibility of • – application deadlines for the Fund) to allow for those who are not diagnosed/do not disclose til later in the year; Application form should be amended to allow greater detail/explanation regarding complex and • – dual disabilities; Greater flexibility in organisations in terms of how funding is used •
• Improvements in college resources; and • Increased knowledge of issues pertaining to disabilities and measures that can help overcome these. Some consultees noted that the FSD was having limited impact for some groups, for example those with mental health illness as their needs are less clear and possibly more complex, and that such needs may be different than those the FSD was originally set up to address. 5.2.5 Other Services Staff interviewed at site visits referred to additional supports provided by their institution for students with a disability. These included: physical resources; interactive social activities specifically designed for students with ASD; workshops in relation to student welfare and student finance (not exclusive to students with a disability); specialised progression support services; health and welfare assistance; physical alterations to buildings where necessary; and timetabling accommodations. Staff in colleges under the auspices of DDLETB highlighted very limited levels of resource available in their organisations. 5.2.6 Looking Ahead Staff reported that the needs assessments on entry to higher education and communication with the HEA worked well however they also highlighted a number of areas for improvement in relation to: • Additional funding • Additional resources in colleges to support accessing FSD – both operational and management level; • Level of funding/support available through FSD relative to time spent accessing this process is disproportionate – scope to simplify process? • Extending the FSD to other students (e.g. part-time students and other categories in FE) or those with a general learning disability); • General learning disability – not felt to be sufficiently catered for; • Mainstreaming and funding for innovation – it was suggested that more supports could be mainstreamed and annual funding should be provided for innovation in the support for students at a national level; • Equipment – a process to sell or donate equipment or guidance on equipment funded by the FSD at the end of a student’s time in education would be beneficial; • Staff training - beneficial if FSD funding could be provided for staff training to raise awareness of the range of disabilities and how they could support students; also awareness raising for students. • Timescales/timing – should be 3/4 opportunities for submission each year (i.e. greater flexibility of application deadlines for the Fund) to allow for those who are not diagnosed/do not disclose til later in the year; • Application form – should be amended to allow greater detail/explanation regarding complex and dual disabilities; • Greater flexibility in organisations in terms of how funding is used
HEA-Review-FSD-October2017-1.docx