Every family who is home educating exempt students is sent a declaration twice a year (in about March and Oct), covering the periods Jan-June and July-Dec, to sign and return, along with forms in which they state whether they wish to receive the supervision allowance. But what about those families who gained an exemption during a 6 month period?

Previously, it worked like this:
If an exemption start date was before the print-run date of all the declarations, the new student's declaration would be included in the normal mail out If it was gained after the print run, then either the period of time from start date to end of period would be included in the subsequent declaration, or Resourcing might send out a late declaration for the part period. 

However, recently they changed this. Now, in theory, it's supposed to work like this:
When a regional office grants an exemption, they are supposed to send out part-period declaration forms to the family for the period from the start date of the exemption to the end of the cycle. Subsequent full-cycle declarations will be sent by Resourcing. 

But, the wheels seem to have seriously fallen off this process over the last 6-12 months! Some regional offices have sent out some declarations, but lots and lots seem not to have been sent. I'm not entirely sure regional staff even know they're supposed to have been doing this! That said, with the huge increase in applications since Sept last year, most regional offices have been seriously struggling to keep up with applications alone, and so many things have "fallen through the cracks."

So, what if a part period declaration was not sent out? Will those dates just be added to the next one?
No, they will not. If you are missing a part-period declaration, you need to contact your regional office, or more efficiently, Resourcing division directly. Their email is Resourcing@education.govt.nz. Quote your family reference number, and ask for the missed declaration. They will email it to you, for you to sign and return. Once completed, any supervision allowance payment will be loaded on the system and paid out in their next available payment run cycle (they do these approximately fortnightly-monthly depending on what payments they are making, but the schedule needs to be full before they do a run so sometimes it's longer). 

If you don't follow up and ask for this, it will remain outstanding for that part period, and you'll still need to ask for it next time around. So may as well just get it done. 

This is also the process to follow any time you happen to have not received a declaration. Also, don't forget to keep the Ministry up to date with your mailing address, as they send the regular declarations out by post. 

In August 2020 I engaged in dialogue with the Ministry of Education regarding their recent arbitrary decision that children over 6 (including exempt students) could not be present at Playcentres (and other ECEs) while their siblings were attending. I challenged them as to the legal basis of this decision. 

As the Ministry response was not satisfactory, I filed a complaint in November 2020 with the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman. The Ombudsman's chief role is to investigate complaints about government agencies, to ensure that actions, decisions and processes are appropriate and fair. 

You can read about previous correspondence etc in via the posts in THIS thread. 

The Ombudman's investigation took some time, in part due to the complex nature of the case and that were were challenging the Ministry's decision on legal grounds. 

Today I received a letter advising the outcome. The Ombudsman found that "....the Ministry acted unreasonably in seeking to issue and impose a rule for which there appears to be no lawful basis." In other words, the "rule" to exclude siblings from being present was not based in law. 

On the other than, there are health and safety and other such considerations which still need to be taken into account - work is being done on that. 

You can read the decision and related expectations in full HERE. Main points:

• The Ministry has accepted that the rule published on its website does not reflect the regulations
• The Ministry has agreed to change the information on their website once there has been engagement across the [ECE] sector. 
• The Ministry has noted various other obligations that will still need to be met in the ECE setting when other people, including other children not enrolled in the service, are present. They intend to clarify this in revising the website messaging. They have undertaken "to work with the sector so it understands and administers the policy fairly and without excluding children who can safely be present."
• The Ombudsman has concluded his investigation but will be keeping an eye on the Ministry's attention to this matter, as he believes it warrants "priority action given the likelihood that there are families currently deterred or prevented from attending Playcentres and other learning centres on account of the information currently on the Ministry's website."

The Ombudsman's concluding note to me was "I trust that you will consider that your persistence in this matter has achieved a worthwhile outcome." Indeed! Thank you to the parents who bought this matter to my attention and provided information, and to the other parent who also lodged a complaint directly with the Ombudsman. 

It may take a little time for this ruling to flow down into updates to the MoE's website and for centres to be fully informed, but the bottom line is that there is now no barrier to families attending Playcentre with their young children while accompanied by their exempt students, so long as the health and safety and other regulatory considerations are met. 

Most of you may have seen THIS news article this week, in which two Northland principals made statements about the need for greater review of homeschooling families. This article may distress some folk, or generate more rumors about what is going to happen. There will also no doubt be a lot of strong feelings about the "cheek" of principals pointing fingers at homeschoolers when it's been clearly demonstrated that the school system is failing miserably in providing children with effective teaching and learning. Claims that kids returning to school are behind are lacking in credibility or substance - every week I work with families taking their kids out of school who are demonstrably way behind where they should be, and it's at home that they make much more progress than they were making in school.

I could write lots of articles with numerous examples of real families and how the school system has let them down, and how much better they've done at home. I could also give lots of example of kids who have been homeschooled for many years and then entered the school system where they've been incredibly successful. There's little point, though, in playing games of tit for tat. If you do want to read some homeschool success stories, though, start HERE.

​And if you want to know more about how home education programmes are currently monitored, see HERE

In regards to the news article, I want you to know the following:

• This article was not a surprise to us. NCHENZ and I were aware it was in the works the week prior, and the gist of it, though not the exact content. And it was also inevitable that something like this would come up with the recent growth in home education, which has taken most of the state sector by surprise.
• All they're really calling for in the article is a return of routine ERO reviews. You can read more about the history of those reviews HERE 

Does this article mean that the govt will immediately bring back ERO reviews? No. There is a process to that. It would require a policy amendment, and the assignment of a good chunk of money - usually that would be something that they would consider in the Budget rounds, not on the spur of the moment. Remember, they stopped doing ERO reviews because they could not justify the expenditure when so few families were found to not be doing an excellent job. 

Would a return to regular ERO reviews be a bad thing? Not necessarily. Some kind of accountability is, generally speaking, a good thing - all of us tend to lift our game when we know we're accountable to someone. For example, a few years ago I decided to set a personal goal to grow 1000kg of produce in my back yard within 12 months. I set up a blog in which to share progress reports and photos and updates because I know myself well enough to know that when I tell people about what I'm trying to achieve, I will do better at making a consistent effort towards it. While nothing bad was going to happen to me if I did not reach my goal, just having that outside "scrutiny" helped motivate me to keep going when it got tough. 

However, there are a few things wrong with ERO reviews as they stand in terms of their usefulness in improving outcomes for our children, which is, after all, the main point:

• The way reviews are currently structured is that they result in a report that you are or are not "teaching your child at least as regularly and well as..". That report goes to the Ministry, who, in theory, can, if the outcome was "are not", summarily revoke your exemption. Not that they always do - there is space to discuss how you will improve things and be allowed to keep going. However, the mere fact that this can happen, makes the whole process very intimidating, which does not bring out the best in anyone, and may result folk being unable to present themselves as well or accurately as they would under other circumstances. 
• ERO's reviews of schools have a different focus - they are deliberately intended these days to help schools find areas where they need to improve, and then giving them space and support to do so. The wording on the website is: "Reviews of schools are focused on continuous improvement through strengthening the capability of schools in identifying priority areas for improvement, including the effectiveness of engagement with whānau, Iwi and the wider communities." Schools are not under threat that one bad review will close the school. This means that schools and home educators are not being reviewed on an equal basis. 
• Currently, reviews of home educators only happen on a complaints basis - so they're going in because there is, theoretically, a problem. This naturally adds tension and a degree of bias to the review. 
• Because so few reviews happen each year, most reviewers are very unfamiliar with home education as a whole, though the ones I've spoken to are supportive in general. Years ago when reviews were first routine, it took quite some time until the few reviewers who focused on home education reviews became familiar with home education in all it's shapes and sizes - they ultimately became some our biggest advocates. We lost that when we lost routine reviews. 
• The questions that ERO use to guide their review are, in some degree, not as useful as they could be, as many of them are not written in terms that are meaningful in the home education context, or even make a lot of sense to homeschooling parents who don't speak "teacher-ese."

What about other possible forms of accountability or review? Traditionally most home educators have strongly desired to maintain independence from any form of "interference" by government departments. Even having to write an exemption application in the first place in order to teach your own children may seem an unnecessary imposition to some. This article is not the place to debate in full these points of view, but know this: I agree that good parents should be able to make their own choices when it comes to their children's education and wellbeing, and not be interfered with. I (and NCHENZ) have long been in a place of advocating to maintain our freedoms as much as possible. However, two things must be acknowledged: sadly not all parents are good parents, and even the good ones can flounder a bit and would benefit from some support, ideas or guidance from time to time. Ignoring these facts does not lead to the best outcomes for members of our community. 

That said, there may be other ways we can help ourselves and each other, that will benefit our children, and not be too burdensome or stressful for busy parents who need to focus on the day to day teaching and guiding of their children. And, maybe, there would also be something in this space that would provide additional assurance to the Ministry that the children are doing ok. 

One of the downsides, it must be understood, of the Ministry having little or no information on the on-going programmes and progress of our children is that it increases concern and pressure at the front end, which is directly responsible (in large part) for the increasingly demanding expectations of staff members who are processing exemption applications. 

So yes, I think we can find other ways to hold ourselves accountable in a way that actually benefits our families, while also helping to calm government sector concerns. 

Work that is being done:
These matters are being worked on on a number of fronts behind the scenes, including by the NCHENZ executive and other key people within the home education sector. It's all still in the discussion and brainstorming stage.

• There is planning being done to have a meeting with key staff to give them an opportunity to express their concerns, so we can listen, and consider those when making suggestions down the track.
• There is work being done on making suggestions for improvements to ERO's review questions, and also considering how some similar questions could help families consider their own progress and next steps periodically.
• There is work being done on considering what data we may be able to share with ERO in respect of the survey they're currently conducting, which may better inform them.
• And there is brainstorming being done, for experienced home educators coming up with ideas which could then be put to the wider home education community around how they might self-review for their own benefit and also provide some appropriate degree of accountability that would help ensure better outcomes for all students, while also relieving concerns.

​Always kept in mind in all of these things is not adding unreasonable burdens to busy families and protecting our privacy and freedom to make individual choices about our children's education. 

Bottom line:
Please don't be distressed by articles like this. And don't engage in speculative rumours about what might happen, and what the Ministry thinks and so on. Do take a moment to ask yourself "How do I personally monitor my own children's progress and achievements? Is there anything I could do better? Would I like any further resources and ideas to help with that?" Whatever your answers to yourself, write them down. This will help you act on them, and will also be helpful when we get to the stage of calling for ideas from the wider home education community. 
​
Know that national representatives of the home education sector and those who work closely with families are working together to find answers, temper concerns, and come up with workable outcomes and ways forward that will be beneficial to families and impose as little as reasonably possible on time and freedoms. We are all volunteers in this space though. We cannot promise to make certain things happen - but we can say we are doing our level best to work for the benefit of the wider home education community. 

The following is excerpted from a write up I did for today's NCHENZ newsletter. If you are a home educator and not yet a member of NCHENZ, I encourage you to join (it's free). 

Background: 
The number of families who are home educating their children has risen significantly since the pandemic began. The number of exempt students as of 1st July 2018 was 6,298; in 2019 it was 6,573, in 2020 it was 7,192 and in 2021 it was 7,749 as of 1st July. By 31st October 2021, the Ministry was reporting that there were 8,253 exempt students, and while I don’t have the current number officially, references have been made to it now sitting around 11,000.

NCHENZ recently completed their annual survey of home educators. Of the 507 families who completed the survey (a statistically significant number), a significant majority indicated they intend to homeschooling until their children finish school, while the number who planned this as only a short term solution was very small. Naturally, some families are as yet undecided, but regardless, I think it is evident that homeschoolers will continue to make up a larger portion of the population than ever before.

ERO conducting a survey
Along with these increases, there is increased interest from various sectors, which is unsurprising. ERO have recently begun conducting a voluntary survey – they are aiming this at a “random selection of parents” who have gained exemptions in the last 3 years. ERO says that “The big picture background is interest in the rising number of requests for exemptions” and “Our interest is in finding out parents’ views on how their home school programmes are going.” (All quotes are directly from ERO's email to me, mentoined below)
​
Their method is to send an email inviting parents to participate and outlining the four areas of questions, then following this up with a phone call to explain more about how this works, and to conduct the survey over the phone. The questions included in the email are:

• Rationale/Motivation -We are interested in what led you to make an  application for home schooling.
• Learning Progress - How is it going? Has the home school programme you set up for [y]our children led to the learning progress you were looking for?
• Support - What support have you been able to access for your home school programme? How useful is the support?
• Duration - Do you have any idea how long you will want your children to continue to be home schooled?
• General question - Overall, what have been the pluses in home schooling? Any minuses?

When I was informed of this survey, I had immediate reservations, and asked ERO for more information, particularly around how the information provided will be used, and how parents’ privacy will be protected. They responded:
“In short, all information from parents will be received in confidence, no names will be used in the summary report and the process for collating parents’ answers to the questions will be anonymous. The information received will only be used for research and statistical purposes.…..Once we have talked with those parents who wish to join in the survey, we will prepare a summary report for ERO’s Chief Executive. We hope to have a summary report ready early in term two. That report will be shared with the Ministry of Education and the parents who participate in the survey in the first instance. The Chief Executive may wish to make some of the summary findings public.”

So, should home educators participate in this survey? Ultimately that is a decision for each of you to make for yourselves. I do understand that the Ministry and ERO will have questions in their minds about the rise in home educating families – such as how many are likely to continue home educating in the longer term (which affects the advise they give to schools, decisions around school funding etc), or wondering whether the kids to whom they have given exemptions are in fact doing ok. And therein lies the rub.

Under the law, all parents have the right to apply for an exemption. The exemption application process requires parents to satisfy the Ministry that the child “will be taught at least as regularly and well as” they would be in school; the exemption is only granted once the Ministry is thus satisfied. After it is granted, the only follow up (due, it must be noted, to previous government decisions based on cost) is the 6 monthly declaration, other than in the few instances where a complaints process leads to an ERO review, for which there is funding to review up to 35 students per year (but numbers more typically sit around 10 reviews conducted).

At this current time there is no other way for Ministry staff to “check up on families” or their children’s progress. And ERO has only had the power to enquire into these things when asked to do a review by the Ministry.

So, what are they thinking? Are they merely curious about the state of things for families who have made the change? Are they trying to figure out to what to do with schools affected by the loss of students? Are they looking for areas where they might actually offer further support or resourcing (that would be nice, but the track record suggests this is unlikely), or are they seeking evidence that could be used to justify greater interference in the lives of home educating families? We do not know at this juncture. I have more questions for ERO, and will add updates of answers received in due course.

Another reservation is that these questions are being asked over the phone, which can lead to unguarded, uneditable answers begin given. If they were being answered by email, folk could think about what they really wanted to say, and make changes before hitting send.

And finally, could this set a precedent? “Give them an inch and they take a mile” is a saying often applied to government departments. Now don’t misunderstand me; as a representative of NCHENZ, I have regular contact with key people at ERO and the Ministry, and have high regard for those currently holding the respective roles. I don’t think they have any underhanded motivations. But I know from long experience that specific staff come and go, but actions and outcomes remain, and one thing can be interpreted differently by someone else and lead to something else and so on and so forth. In my role as Government Liaison for NCHENZ, I have to take the long view. If ERO successfully runs a survey now, will they decide to run them regularly? Would this be a good thing, or not? If the survey suggests that families are struggling, what action might they take? Would it be beneficial to the community as a whole, or not, as well as to individual families? Could this voluntary survey morph into something compulsory down the track?

Again, do not misunderstand me – I am all for being able to give feedback to the MoE/ERO about issues such as lack of support in schools leading to the choice to home educate, and opportunities that could lead to better resourcing options etc. The question is, is this the right way for these things to happen? And is there a downside?

Do I have all the answers to the above questions? No, I don’t. Which is why we circle back to, it’s up to each family whether they want to take part in this survey. If you choose to do so, proceed with at least some caution.

The NCHENZ survey collected a lot of useful data, including that related to a number of ERO’s questions. If NCHENZ were to provide ERO with a selection of such data, families personal information would be completely protected. If ERO or Ministry were to seek information about home educators through a representative body such as NCHENZ, that degree of separation would provide a greater layer of privacy and protection, while still furnishing useful information. 

Update 25th March:
ERO have responded to two further questions I sent them:

• What sample size are you aiming for?

 We are hoping to engage with approximately 80 families from the random list of 100 forwarded by the Ministry

• Who originally requested this survey?

  The survey is an ERO initiative. 

The Ministry of Education is conducting a review and would like input from families who have children with learning support needs, and would value input from home educators. The stated purpose of the review is:

You can read more about the review here: ​https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/highest-needs-review/ 

You can have your say by making a submission using the online portal HERE, or by emailing highestneeds.review@education.govt.nz 

Submissions close 31st March 2022.

A comment passed on to me by a home educator who talked with Manager of the Highest Needs Review: "She agrees that it is important to give homeschool families a voice in the highest need review that the MoE are currently doing. She wants parents to know that they can send their thoughts and feedback in (regardless of the fact that their children are not attending mainstream schools)."

In November 2020, I lodged a complaint with the Ombudsman about the Ministry ruling that home educated students could not be present on Playcentre grounds with their families, effectively meaning families with preschool aged children could not longer utilise Playcentre. You can read the details and correspondence in THIS thread. 

Today, 28th Feb 2022, I have received a letter from the Chief Ombudsman to say that he has decided to investigate the complaint and has now begun making enquiries with the Ministry's Chief Executive. 

In the latter half of last year, I was asked for some additional information by the Ombudsman's Senior Investigator, which I supplied. I gather from this letter that they have now concluded the situation warrants a formal investigation and ruling. I have not been given any indication how long this is likely to take, other than "We will write to you again shortly." 

Updates when they are available. 

The Ministry of Education normally receives about 200 applications per month for exemptions. Since September 2021, they have been receiving around 800 applications per month. That four-fold increase is resulting in applications often taking longer than the usual 4-6 weeks to process, though that does vary from region to region.

Meanwhile parents who have chosen to home educate may be in various stages - application submitted some time ago and awaiting the outcome, application only recently submitted, or application not submitted yet. Those who submitted applications well before Christmas may understandably feel that it's not fair if they are expected to send their kids to school for the beginning of this term when they did their part in a timely manner, and it's the Ministry who are taking a long time. Parents who more recently submitted applications, or have not done so yet, can of course not have reasonably expected to have exemptions before the school term started, in most cases. 

Regardless of the timing, there are a wide range of reasons why parents may not want to send their kids to school right now, including:

• They are all set up and ready to start homeschooling; want to get on with it, not disrupt the children's learning by putting them into school and then pull them back out again within a few days/week. 
• Reluctance to expose their children to possible COVID in the school setting, with the country at Red, and Omicron starting to move through the country. In some cases, this may be because of medically vulnerable family members. 
• Concern over vaccine mandates or mask mandates.
• All the other many reasons why parents want to choose homeschooling in the first place, and may not see any benefit or sense in sending the kids back to school while awaiting the exemption.

The surge in homeschooling applications has been attracting a lot of media attention recently. Schools have also in some cases not been sure how to handle things as the term begins. The Ministry of Education puts out a regular bulletin to school leaders on COVID-related matters. This week's bulletin, on 1st Feb, included the following section regarding home education applications:

​"Applications for home education

Since September there has been a significant increase in enquiries from parents about home education.
Information about home education and the application process is on our website for parents and whānau.
 
Here are some key messages about home education you can use if parents and whānau inquire.

• Home education is not a short-term solution. To home educate well, parents need to thoroughly research and plan their approach.
• If parents are concerned about their children attending school during the pandemic, they should first talk with their children’s teachers and principal about alternative learning options that the school may be able to support.
• Parents must apply for an exemption to home educate their children and they must demonstrate in their application that they can teach their children as regularly and as well as in a registered school.
• Applications are reviewed and assessed by our Ministry regional staff and exemptions are approved/declined at the regional level.
• We are currently assessing a large number of home education applications and decisions are taking longer than usual – on average more than six weeks. While families wait for their application to be assessed, legally all children aged over six years must be enrolled at and attending school (children can enrol at age five and then they must attend)."

I've seen already several schools tell families they have had "advice from the Ministry that students must remain enrolled in/attending school until they receive their exemptions" and so insist that the students go to school. While it is true that the law requires students 6-15 to be enrolled/attend until/unless exempt, this has always been the case. The Ministry's statement above is simply repeating the facts. It's not new or a harder line. 

What is missing from this statement is the fact that 5 year olds can be removed from school without an exemption. For more on that see HERE

Because the law only states, in effect, two things around this subject, it does not leave specific space for transition. Those two things are:

• ​All students aged 6-15 must be enrolled in and attend school
• Parents can apply for and be granted an exemption from the above for their student

The law, does, however, include some specific statements around reasons why a school/principal/the Secretary might excuse a student from attending. These include:

• Attending suitable alternative tuition
• A transition plan to ease a student into full time attendance due to age, medical or psychological needs
• The student lives significant walking distance from the school (varies by age)
• Short term "justified absence"  or "because it is sensible to do so" - however these are limited to 5 & 7 days respectively. 

For more info on these, see the relevant sections of THIS article. 

Though it is not specifically stated in law, a medical practitioner can also, when appropriate, write a medical certificate excusing a student from attendance for a period of time, which the school must accept.  

So where does commonsense come in? Are there some circumstances in which it might be sensible not to send kids to school while waiting on the exemption certificate? Most people would likely say yes, there are. And they may well be right. However, the law, as we've seen, does not explicitly allow for those things; it comes down to people using commonsense, hopefully in agreement with one another where more than one party is involved. Here are some examples that might be appropriate:

• A parent has submitted exemption applications more than 6 weeks ago, but the Ministry has not yet finished processing them. This family was anticipating being approved and beginning homeschooling from the beginning of Term 1. They've got all the books and everything set up ready to go. If they send their kids back to school, then it may only be literally days, or a couple more weeks, before they are approved, and would be taken back out of school. Sending them seems disruptive both to the student and to the school (as well as unnecessarily expensive if new school uniforms/stationery/fees are needed). Perhaps the family can discuss this with the school, and the school may be supportive of this, either marking this as acceptable alternative tuition as discussed in my truancy article linked above, or marking them as unjustified absence, but with no intention to refer the family to attendance services as long as the exemptions come through in the near future.
• A family has a medically vulnerable person and has genuine concerns about COVID, not wanting to send their kids to school until things settle down. According to the Ministry bulletin quoted above, schools may be able to provide alternative learning options for them. This could be instead of transitioning to homeschooling, or while transitioning to homeschooling if they plan to keep them at home in the longer term. 
• A family has not yet submitted exemption applications; they recognise that it will take some time before they have the exemptions, and decide to send their children to school until they are received. This is sensible and appropriate unless there are reasons they cannot or should not be at school, such as health and safety reasons, mental well being issues etc, in which case they should likely talk to their doctor about a medical certificate in the meantime.
• A family has submitted applications recently; it may be a while until they receive the exemptions, but they believe they have genuine reasons for not sending the children to school in the meantime. Depending on the circumstances, they may be able to discuss this with the school, or a medical professional and come to some agreement. 
• A family strongly feels that, though they need to wait upon the exemptions, that their duty of care to their children's wellbeing and best interests means that they are not able to send them to school in the interim. Despite the school being unsupportive of this, they make this choice, knowing that they may be followed up by attendance services, and could potentially face prosecution, though this usually only occurs in extreme or long-running situations. (For more on how that works, see HERE). This family would, if they have not already, get their exemption applications completed and submitted asap. Attendance Services, if they become involved, may apply commonsense by seeing that the family is genuinely working on/awaiting the application process, and has made this decision based upon what they believe is best for their children, and therefore taking no further action other than ensuring the exemption was approved in due course, so they can close their file. 

These are just some examples of how commonsense may be applied. They are all genuine examples that have occurred in one form or another, but this does not guarantee they will work out that way for any given family. 

The bottom line is, every family should do their best to remain within the letter of the law if at all possible. However, sometimes circumstances result in a wee bit of colouring outside of the lines during a transition phase. If that occurs, it should be kept to the shortest time possible, and reasonable communication should be maintained with others involved, such as the school, Attendance Services or whomever. It is very unlikely that the Ministry will be rushing to prosecute anyone who is genuinely transitioning from school to home education. However, if families take their kids out of school for long periods without gaining an exemption, that would be a completely different situation. 

A lot of conflicting advice is floating around about this. Families are asking "Do I have to send my kids to school at Red level?" The government's position on this has been clear: schools are open and students should attend at red level. This is in fact simply the law; the law requires students who are enrolled to attend whenever the school is open. So, except where there are health orders that require a school to close, or require students to not attend (eg due to close contact situations), then the standard laws are operating and all students are legally require to attend. 
However, as noted in the Ministry's bulletin to school leaders quoted above, schools may be able to offer alternative learning options if parents are concerned about their children attending during the pandemic.  

Once an exemption is granted, how is a home education programme monitored? In order to legally home educate a child, the parents must go through a significant application process, in order to "satisfy" the Ministry of Education that "the child is to be taught at least as regularly and well as in a registered school" in order for the exemption certificate to be granted under Section 38 of the Education and Training Act 2020. 
But once the exemption is granted, then what? 

Note: The wording on the letter that comes with a certificate of exemption talks about ERO contacting parents and conducting reviews. This is there only because they might be called upon to do a review, as outlined below. They do not routinely do them. 

Let's explore the ins and out, parental obligations, Ministry responsibility, and where ERO comes in. The relevant sections of the law are near the end of this post, for reference. 

The Ministry of Education is responsible (under law) to process an exemption application and determine whether the proposed programme of learning outlined therein satisfactorily demonstrates that the child will be "taught as regularly and well as" they would be in school. Once they've determined that and granted the exemption, do they have an on-going responsibility to check that the child continues to be thus taught? And if so, how do they do that?

The law gives ERO the ability to review home educators, and it give the Ministry the ability to ask ERO to carry out a review. It also states that the Ministry cannot revoke an exemption without first considering the outcome of an ERO review. 

What the law does NOT do is require the Ministry to regularly review home educators or in any other way follow up on their exemption & home education programme, nor specifically empower them to ask questions about the education programme of the exempt child after an exemption has been granted, except where they are gathering information when considering whether an exemption should be revoked. 

Anything that a government department does in terms of its processes and procedures that is not explicitly set out in law is rather based on policy. Policies are the ways in which the law is interpreted and applied as decided within a department. Policies can be changed relatively easily. Laws required parliamentary process to be changed. Policies should always, always be within the boundaries and scope set by the law, but sometimes they drift beyond this (if so they can be subject to challenge and amendment). Laws are generally quite broadly worded, leaving room for policy to be developed around how they are applied.

The Ministry, at the directive of the then-government, ceased routine ERO reviews of home educators on the 30th June 2009. (For more detailed history and review statistics see HERE).  Since then, they have provided funding for up to 35 reviews per year. That's review of up to  35 students, not 35 families, as they pay per-student that is reviewed. And how do they decide who will be reviewed in any given year? Their policy is that reviews are initiated only when/if the Ministry has some reason to believe they may need to check up on a family. In rare cases, this could be initiated by information from a government department, but for the most part this only happens as a result of what is known as the "complaints process." More on that shortly. 

So, in the absence of ERO reviews, how is the Ministry to determine whether an exempt child continues to be "taught as regularly and well as"? Do they even need to? As we've seen above, in fact, no, they don't actually need to, under law. However, there is one cardinal unwritten rule of all government departments. I like to call it "C.A.R.E" which stands for "Cover [rear], Retain Employment." In other words, nearly everything they do is predicated upon the ideal of never leaving themselves open to being found responsible for something going horribly wrong because of something they did, or neglected to do. (Look carefully at the actions of any govt dept and you'll see that this is true). 

This kind of mindset has led to a number of ideas over the years. The most persistent one is some variation on this: "If we grant an exemption for little Johnny when he's 6 and he turns out to be an uneducated societal misfit when he's 16 it will be ALL OUR FAULT. Therefore we need assurance that Johnny will be ok." 

And this, in the absence of routine ERO reviews, is what led to the policy of sending out 6 monthly declarations for parents to sign and return, on which parents affirm that their child has been "taught at least as regularly and well as.." for the last 6 months, and will be for the next 6 months (or insert start/stop dates). And because there is no legal basis for these declarations, they can't force parents to sign and return them. Thus the other policy - of linking the supervision allowance to the return of these declarations - it's the "carrot" to get most folk to do so. "You send us this piece of paper, duly signed, and we'll give you the allowance." We've been assured, you've been paid, everyone's happy. Or something like that. 

But what if you don't care about the allowance and don't sign and return the form? Well, that's when they might act upon another policy. That is, since they haven't been assured via the declaration that little Johnny is still being taught as regularly and well, then they must have an "obligation" to investigate further, to ensure he is. This makes them "concerned" about Johnny's learning programme, and this is where the complaints process can also come in. 

As noted above, the only time, under the law, that the Ministry has the right or obligation to "gather information" related to the learning programme of an exempt student once the exemption has been granted, is when they are considering whether there is grounds for the exemption to be revoked. That is, they are considering whether there are grounds for them to NOT be satisfied that the child is being taught as regularly and well. And why would they be considering that?

Under current policy, since routine ERO reviews ended, they do this on a "complaints basis"- that is, if someone  expresses a "concern" or makes a "complaint" to the Ministry suggesting that an exempt child is not being satisfactorily educated, then they investigate to determine whether or not that is the case.

Legally, they can immediately request an ERO review to make this determination, but as this process is sadly open to abuse by people just wanting to make trouble for the homeschooling family, the Ministry agreed to a NCHENZ request that they first talk to the family about the complaint and give them an opportunity to address what might be going on before deciding whether to initiate an ERO review, and this has become part of the process. 

However, the way this is being interpreted and applied is not really what was originally agreed to. The NCHENZ request was both to ask the Ministry to investigate the source of the complaint to determine legitimacy, and so that if a family knew that there was someone with a personal axe to grind who might be making a nefarious complaint to the Ministry, this could be identified and an ERO review not pursued unfairly. This has mostly morphed instead into the Ministry asking families for an update on their learning programme so that they can decide whether there is likely to be an issue that warrants further investigation via ERO. 

So, if the Ministry receives a complaint or an expression of concern about your children's home education programme, they will contact you to let you know, and ask you for an update on their programme. If the complaint expressed specific issues, they may ask you just to speak to those, or they could ask for a more general update. Either way, you have the right to see the original complaint before you respond, though any identifying information about the person complaining will be redacted. You can ask for this under the Privacy Act. 

You then have the opportunity to put together such information as you feel is appropriate and submit it to the Ministry, who will then review it and decide if what you have provided satisfies them that your children are continuing to be taught "as regularly and well" - in which case they advise you of this and close the file - or not - in which case they request an ERO review, and advise you they have done so. 

However, if a previous complaint did not result in an ERO review, and another one has been received, Ministry policy is generally to skip asking for an update and just refer to ERO.

The regional office that deals with exemptions for your area is the same one that would deal with the above process. However, they cannot on their own authority ask ERO to conduct a review - they must put in a request to the national Ministry office, who need to check everything is in order and confirm the request, and then order the review. 

If this happens, then ERO would contact your family in due course, arrange a time to meet with you and conduct the review, advise you of the expected outcome, write a report on their findings, send you a draft copy to review and request amendment to if appropriate, before sending the final report to the Ministry. ERO reviews can take several hours, but result in reports that are typically less than 2 pages long. They always conclude with a statement that the child IS being or is NOT being "taught at least as regularly and well as in a registered school."

If the finding is that the child "is being taught as regularly and well as" then the Ministry will be satisfied and close the file, and the family's home education programme carries on. If the finding is that they are not, then what happens next depends on certain factors, including whether ERO suggested the family could meet the requirements with a few changes or some additional support, and/or whether the Ministry (and the family) are open to discussing how the family might improve their programme to meet the requirements and so give them another chance. Otherwise, they will enact the law to revoke the exemption/s. 

I will write more detailed posts separately about responding to a complaint-based info request, and preparing for an ERO review.

When parents decide to home educate their child, they are taking full personal responsibility for their child's learning programme. This is not something to be entered into lightly, and the application process itself ensures that parents have thought through what and how their child will be taught. (For more on this process see HERE). 

Once the exemption is granted, the parent continues to assume full legal and moral responsibility to ensure their child is educated at least as well (and regularly) as they would be in a school. Many parent's personal bar is a lot higher than "as in a school." Yes, this is a responsibility, but it's also a privilege and a right - the right to decide how and where your child will be educated, the privilege of being right there with them to see the learning happening and to be a part of it all alongside your child. 

Part of being responsible for your child's education is, in some appropriate way, self-reviewing how things are going from time to time - considering what the next steps in your child's learning are, how you will facilitate those things, whether additional resources are needed, whether your child is progressing appropriately etc. Alongside of this is a need to record progress somehow. Now, there are no rules or laws about how you do any of this - it's up to you. Whatever you decide about the details, the purpose of this is primarily to serve you and your child by supporting their learning journey and helping you to manage things more easily. There are many great ideas to be gleaned from other experienced home educators about how they do this; what you choose to put in place should not be so burdensome that it unnecessarily detracts from the time you need to actually engage with and teach your children. 

One of the big pluses of maintaining some kind of on-going record is that in the event you are asked for information by the Ministry or have an ERO review, it will be so much easier for you to pull things together in response or preparation. Another plus is that when they're grown and gone you'll enjoy looking back at those reminders and memories, plus when some other parent (or maybe your own children when they want to homeschool their children) asks you how you did things, or what you used etc, the answers will be at your fingertips! (Believe me, those things you think you will remember in vivid detail often are not so easy to recall!)

NCHENZ has some helpful info on planning and record keeping, as well as examples from two families. 

So, the most significant responsibility of a home educating parent is the daily and on-going teaching, guiding and supporting of your learner, with all that that implies including resourcing, reviewing progress, maintaining appropriate records that serve you etc. Your other responsibilities include:

• Signing and returning the 6 monthly declarations
• Being able to give the Ministry an update if requested
• Being able to provide ERO with evidence of your child's learning programme and progress if requested. ERO ask questions, but also look for evidence to support your answers. Which is where records of some kind and/or samples of work come in. 

The Education and Training Act 2020 sets out the laws around gaining (and keeping) an exemption, and the powers of ERO as it applies to homeschooling. 
I've written a more detailed post regarding all sections of the Act that may be relevant to home educators HERE; for the purposes of this post, I'll quote two ,main parts:

Once an exemption has been granted, the on-going monitoring of a home education programme primarily rests with the parents, who have chosen to accept responsibility for their own children's education. The vast majority do an excellent job (which is why the government felt justified in de-funding routine ERO reviews). On the other hand, the Ministry does check up on families via 6 monthly declarations, and when a complaint/concern is brought to their attention, via a request for an update and/or an ERO review. 

First, some quick facts you need to know:
1) Being asked for additional information is quite normal (more on this below).
2) If you are asked for additional information, you have up to 4 weeks (28 calendar days) to provide it, otherwise the application "lapses". Even if the Ministry letter asking for more info doesn't say how long you have, or it gives you a shorter timeframe, they can only lapse if if you have not responded within 4 weeks. Sometimes an office may give you longer - eg 28 working days - and if that's what they put in the letter, that's fine - you have that longer time. 
3) A "lapsed" application simply means that the Ministry has not received a response from you, and don't have sufficient information in the original application to satisfy the requirements of an exemption, so it is "declined" on the basis that it has lapsed. Lapsed in this context just means "no longer being continued" ie the application process cannot continue without the additional information, and so it is ended, as the Ministry cannot keep an application open forever. 
4) You can ask for additional time if needed. Once they send you that request, the Ministry has no idea whether you're working on it or ignoring them, unless you choose to contact them. If you find you need a bit longer to put the information together, or some life event has got in the way, send them an email and let them know you're working on it but need a bit longer, and politely ask for an extension. Suggest the deadline by which you expect to be able to give them this info. Most Ministry staff are reasonable about this and willing to allow a bit of extra time, within reason. 
5) If you don't provide the info by the deadline and your application is lapsed, that does not mean the end of your ability to gain an exemption. In this instance, if you wish to proceed, you can update your application/s to ensure they include the extra info that was asked for, and then resubmit them. They will be treated as new applications (and so must contain all the required parts of any application). Note that this means extra work for the Ministry, as they're having to start the process over, which is why in most instances most regional staff would prefer to give you an extension on receiving the additional info, rather than lapse it and have to start all over when you submit new applications. 

When folk write an application, they (usually) put a lot of effort into the process. However, sometimes they have not yet fully understood the requirements, or they have great ideas in their minds but have not articulated them in sufficient detail, or they have not been explicit enough in some areas, or have missed something out entirely.  

Regardless, being asked for additional information is common (35-39% of applications are asked for more info), and not something to be worried or stressed about - it's just part of the process when required. Any time regional Ministry staff are reviewing an application and believe there is not sufficient information included to satisfy them as to "as regularly and well" they are required to ask the family for additional information. This is a good thing - it means they can't just decline an application without providing an opportunity for the family to answer their questions and supply the missing info. 

Different regional offices use different processes to do this - some will call and give you a heads up first, others will just email or write etc. Regardless of how they contact you, know that you are not required to answer questions over the phone, or to meet with them, unless you wish to. You should be provided with their questions in writing, and then have time to think about your responses and put the info together (hence the 4 weeks). If you prefer to explain your thoughts over the phone or in person (once you've thought it through), then you can choose to do that - they will take notes of what you've shared, though I think in writing is usually best, as a paper trail is always helpful, unless you are a person who finds it easier to explain things verbally rather than in writing. 

When you are putting together your written response, bear in mind that you do not have to update your original application (though you can if that is easier for you); you can just write up your answers to their questions separately to your original application, and then send that in by email, in the body of the email or as an attachment. 

Requests for more info vary hugely from a few simple questions to a long list of parts of your application where they want more info. Some offices use a form letter, some don't. Some will quote parts of the Ministry's guidance documents, some will send links to the NZ curriculum etc, some will not. Sometimes the additional quotes or links they send you will help clarify things, sometimes they will just add further confusion. 

Before you can respond to the Ministry's questions, you need to take a little time to make sure you understand what they are asking. If you're not sure, then consider the following to help:

• At the bottom of the Ministry's homeschooling page, where the application forms can be downloaded, is also their guidance document which seeks to add further clarity around the application requirements. If you haven't previously looked at it, you may wish to. 
• My guide to exemption applications can help you understand the requirements of an application, which may help you see what you're missing in the areas the Ministry is asking about.
• Experienced homeschoolers on some of the NZ Facebook pages or in your local regional groups may be able to answer any questions you have and give you some guidance. You can find on the NCHENZ site list of regional support groups and online networks. Just check if anyone offers one-on-one help around your application to make sure they are experienced home educators with recent exemption application experience, to ensure that they properly understand the requirements and how homeschooling works. The application forms and requirements changed in early 2016, so anyone who has not done exemptions since then may not be fully aware of current expectations, and anyone who has not personally homeschooled for a reasonable period of time will not truly understand how it works. You can certainly glean useful info and ideas from a range of sources and perspectives, but at this stage of the process, if you choose to seek specific support, you would be best served by someone with appropriate experience. 
• I offer a service to folk in this area - where I would review your application, what the Ministry have asked for, discuss the requirements with you and give you some pointers about things to consider or where to find further info/ideas etc, and then review your draft response to the Ministry and discuss further as needed until you're ready to submit it. I can also refer you to others who can help with this too. 

Also, if the Ministry ask a question that you do not understand, or that is in "edu-speak" that is confusing, it's ok to ask them to please clarify the question. 

After you submit the additional information, the Ministry staff member dealing with your application will process it, considering the additional info together with what you first sent in. If they are now satisfied as to "as regularly and well" they will recommend it for approval and pass it on to be peer reviewed and then ultimately signed off by the manager. It is possible, though relatively uncommon, for a peer reviewer or manager to come back and ask for some further information - if this happens, just treat it like any other request for info as above. Otherwise, the application should be approved and you will be sent the exemption. This part of the process can take anywhere from a couple of days to a few more weeks. Don't stress about it (I know, easier said than done!). If they didn't actually acknowledge receiving the added info and you've heard nothing within a couple of weeks, you may just want to call or email to make sure they have received it and things are continuing as they should be. Also note that some offices only email out certificates - so do check your junk mail from time to time, just in case. 

If they are not satisfied as to "as regularly and well", they MAY come back and ask a bit more, though they are not required to. Otherwise, they will decline the application. This also would go through a peer review process first, and must be peer reviewed by a different office before being declined. If you are declined, you can still reapply. For more on this see HERE. 

Being asked for additional information in an exemption application is common, and a normal part of the process where required. You can seek support around understanding the requirements and how to respond. Your response should reflect further clarification of YOUR own plan for your child's home education, rather than an attempt to "just give them what they want." Once you provide the additional information, they will proceed with processing your application, which may take a few days or weeks, and will most often (95-97%) result in the exemption being approved. If you are declined, or the application lapses, you can work on improving your application and then resubmit it to the Ministry. 

An article in the news today reads, in part: 

Source/full article HERE

Here is a graph from another article published recently that shows the trend in applications over the past couple of years, to Oct 2021

Further stats added 9th Feb 2022:
The Ministry reported receiving a total of 867 applications in November, 800 in December, and 735 in January. 
"The ministry said it last year [2021] approved 2655 applications for home-schooling, declined 78 and was still deliberating over 983.
​The figures also show the ministry received more than 900 applications for Auckland in 2021, nearly double the previous year's figure, about 500 applications in Canterbury and more than 400 in Waikato."
​Source HERE

For comparison, total applications received by the Ministry for:
July 2018-June 2019 = 1,553 
July 2019-June 2020 = 2,005
July 2020-June 2021 = 2,087

Note that in the first half of 2021, total applications received = 1,019. In the article quoted above, the Ministry state they have received 3225 applications this year to 8th December, which means that in the second half of this year, they have received 2,206 so far - more than all of the applications in the previous 12 months. We can add about a further 600 to that with the release of December's numbers above, for a total of about 3825 for the year, or about 2806 in the second half of the year.