A few years ago, I used to be a primary headteacher in England, so we were looking at different models, then, at various conferences, and I believe Oxford, as a local authority—they had a PRU, and they had discussions with their secondary schools, then, whether to get rid of the PRU, as such, and give the money back into schools. But they looked at a partnership within the schools, then, to say, 'Okay, you can have the money, but there's got to be terms of reference'—not quite a service level agreement, but the schools worked together as a partnership, then, so that they couldn't keep moving the children around, the learners around. It's looking at how well that worked. It started off really well, but that was a few years ago, so I don't know whether it's continued now. But that was a model that, at the time, that local authority looked at to get more money into schools and to get schools, then, to have that responsibility—that they didn't offload the learners elsewhere.
Nick, you wanted to—.
Yes, sorry. We do something similar in Swansea. We've operated this now for almost three years, where we devolve—the word is 'devolve', as opposed to 'delegate'—the money to secondary schools to try and give them some extra resource to manage the process, and they have to produce an action plan, which we monitor, about how they're using that funding. But, obviously, we recognise that—and it's back to your original question, the first question—we still have learners, unfortunately, despite pretty effective support and provision in nearly all our schools, because of the very, very challenging behaviour we're experiencing, who do need additional and bespoke support, which in fairness the school can't provide. So, it's a mixed economy, if you like, in Swansea.
Okay, thank you. Janet.