Executive summary 

• Malden Oaks is an innovative high quality alternative and specialist provision.

• Safeguarding practice is fully-embedded in the culture of the school at all levels and robust systems support the school’s ever-increasing caseload of students receiving support from social care.

• Malden Oaks is unique in combining ambitious academic opportunities with a nurturing, safe environment that meets students’ complex SEMH needs. This means that students who have not been able to access special SEMH schools, are able to achieve success at Malden Oaks. 

• Students benefit from a bespoke, broad and creative curriculum offer, that takes account of their starting points, gaps in their learning, their individual needs and their aspirations. The number of subjects on offer is exceptional. 

• GCSE outcomes are consistently significantly higher than national outcomes for Alternative Provision and when compared to special SEMH schools.

• Students’ registered attendance at Malden Oaks is significantly better than at their previous setting.

• Evidence shows that students’ attitude to learning and resilience improves during their time at Malden Oaks.

• Malden Oaks is able to support students that other specialist providers and alternative provisions cannot.

• Parents communicate a high level of satisfaction, both formally and informally.

• Feedback from schools and students evidences that outreach is a particular strength with an ever-expanding alternative curriculum offer.

• Students receive targeted support to enable them to be successful in the next step of their education, employment and/or training. 

• Staff satisfaction and retention is extremely high, reflecting the shared values and ethos at the heart of Malden Oaks’ work.

• Leaders and staff work at a fast pace to respond to ever-increasing external demand. Over the past 2 years the number of students and staff has doubled, from 200 students in 2022 - 2023 to over 400 students in 2024-2025 . This means that systems, procedures and structures are constantly refined and able to cope with change and growth. 

• Management Committee members have appropriate skills and are pro-active and robust in discharging their duties.

• Key challenges for the school are the lack of adequate premises, particularly in Richmond, and constant funding pressures. 

The unique approach that leads to these outcomes

• We deliberately invest in experienced, specialist teachers to deliver high quality teaching. This directly contrasts with many other specialist/alternative settings who rely on a large number of support staff. 

• Heads of School are qualified SENCOs, with significant leadership experience, ensuring that accountability and oversight is rigorous.

• We do not use supply agencies.

• We choose not to use LSAs/TAs either to support within the classroom or instead of teachers, as this is an ineffective use of resources for our student cohort.

• We have a clear ‘No rewards and no sanctions’ policy.

• We have a needs-led approach that ensures that the appropriate provision is put in place with the child at the centre.

• We act nimbly to respond to challenges. We re-purpose space, redeploy staff and adapt our curriculum, at a moment’s notice.

• We do not have ‘interventions’ we have ‘provision’.

• We do not have therapies, we have a therapeutic environment.

• We seek to adapt the environment not to change the child

• If we can’t find an immediate solution, we don’t say no, we say ‘not yet’ and ‘how can we?’

• In everything we do, we aim to be good enough for all children, including those that are important in our own lives.

• All staff are restraint trained, but we focus on de-escalation with the result that actual restraint is extremely rare. 

• We experience multiple set-backs, just like our students. We constantly battle for adequate funding and premises, but in the face of this adversity we keep positive and make the most of what we have, whilst showing endless resilience in advocating for our students and what they need and deserve. 

• We frequently ask ourselves and others “Would this be good enough for the students at [insert name of a local secondary school]?” If the answer is no, then it’s not good enough for our students, regardless of who might think otherwise.