Agenda item

Purpose of the report:

To provide the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee with a progress update on the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) self-evaluation and strategy (which is being taken forward as the Additional Needs and Disabilities Strategy, in line with feedback outlined below), including an assessment of current performance, recent progress and next steps.

Witnesses:

Clare Curran, Cabinet Member for Education and Learning

Liz Mills, Director – Education and Lifelong Learning

Hayley Connor, Director – Commissioning

Julia Katherine, Assistant Director - Inclusion and Additional Needs

Claire Poole, Interim Chief Executive of Family Voice Surrey

Benedicte Symcox, Former Chief Executive of Family Voice Surrey

Key points raised in the discussion:

1. The Assistant Director introduced the item, noting that the new strategy would be in place from the beginning of 2023, building on a partnership that has been completed. The strategy aims to improve outcomes for children and young people and the experiences of families. The work of the strategy was overseen by the Surrey Additional Needs and Disabilities Partnership Board, which included a range of stakeholders. The former Chief Executive of Family Voice Surrey added that the Board was a collaborative space, and the self-evaluation was an example of co-produced work between partners.

2. The Chairman asked about the options provided to respondents of the parent/carer satisfaction survey. The Assistant Director explained that the survey included a standard five-point scale from ‘very unsatisfied’ to ‘very satisfied’. Parents and carers who had a child with an Educational Health and Care Plan (EHCP) were asked how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with the support their child receives from professionals to support them with their additional needs and/or disability: 46% responded ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ (14% very dissatisfied). A higher proportion of parents and carers who had a child receiving special educational need (SEN) support were satisfied with the support their child receives from their school to support them with their additional needs and/or disability: 52% responded ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ (11% very dissatisfied).
3. The Chairman asked why the appeal rate was higher in Surrey than the national average and what proportion of those were successful. The Assistant Director explained that the number of statutory assessments had increased , which impacted the number of appealable decisions. One potential reason for an appeal was a lack of specialist provision, which was being addressed by the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) capital programme. The Director for Education and Lifelong Learning added that of the 578 appeals made up to the end of the last academic year, 265 were ongoing at the time of recording and 233 of those did not end up being heard by the tribunal or were resolved. The reasons for this were carefully monitored. Of those that were heard (79), approximately 50% were awarded in favour of the family. Service managers were trained in restorative approaches and tried to work with families to prevent appeals from occurring. The service had published ‘Ordinarily Available Provision’ guidance to set clear expectations about the range of support that could be made without the need for a statutory plan.

4. A Member asked how the quality of EHCPs were monitored. The Assistant Director responded that there was a team of quality managers who co-ordinated a multi-agency audit process to monitor the results. An audit tool was used to audit a representative number of plans regularly and a deep dive was conducted on a termly basis. The Member queried the steps taken when a plan did not meet the required standards. The Assistant Director explained that it would be fed back to the professionals involved and addressed through training.  

5. A Member asked how changes in practice were being made to reduce delays in assessments and annual reviews, as well as the causes for such delays. The Assistant Director explained that they would work closer with families to ensure that when delays occurred, families were kept informed. Delays were often due to the involvement of multiple agencies in the assessment. The Council was working with schools to ensure that the support provided in schools continued whilst a statutory plan was being finalised for a child.

6. In reply to a question on response times, the Director explained that there had been a high turnover of staff and these roles had since been filled. Therefore, response times would improve over the autumn period. The Learners’ Single Point of Access captured data and produced reports on response times and a new system had been introduced which produced more advanced information in this area. There had been work with the customer relations team and contact centre to improve monitoring through this pathway.

7. A Member asked about the barriers to children receiving provision and the consequences for both schools and the Council if it was not provided. The Assistant Director explained that one reason was due to recruitment challenges. The Council had a statutory responsibility to ensure that the provision specified in the plan was delivered and this was monitored through annual reviews. In the past two years, appeals to tribunals could now consider issues related to health and care provision as well. The Council formally consulted with schools before placing a child to ensure the child’s needs could be met. The same process applied with academies and independent schools.

8. The Chairman asked Family Voice whether they feel that relationships with the Council had improved. The Interim Chief Executive of Family Voice explained that since she had joined the organisation in 2015, the relationship had significantly improved, especially from 2019 onwards. They had built a successful co-productive and collaborative relationship and were looking forward to the benefits of this filtering down to the families that they represented. The former Chief Executive added that the priorities were correct, and it was important that the NHS were involved in the partnership, as a lot of children primarily had health needs. A key determinant of success was how schools would fit into the partnership, as this would depend on the willingness and ability of each individual school.

9. A Member asked whether there was additional funding to manage the increase of EHCPs. The Assistant Director explained that statutory plans were only for approximately 3-4% of children who had the most complex needs. The key objective was that children’s needs were met at the earliest opportunity. The Director added that all funding for children in this area came from the High Needs Funding Block and this had been constituted in the Safety Valve agreement with the Department for Education. There were contributions from partners and there were joint commissioning arrangements with health colleagues. Schools were directly funded to provide for children with Special Educational Needs (SEN). The former Chief Executive shared that historically, families saw an EHCP as a guarantee of support for their child. In response to a question on whether cuts in provision would be required as the Safety Valve Agreement was not a long-term solution, the Director explained that it was designed to put the Council back on a trajectory to meet need within the funding envelope provided. It would require both a change of culture and practice

10. In response to a question on the level of young people with SEN not in education, employment, or training (NEET), the Director explained that there was a preparation for adulthood plan, and they worked closely with Adult Social Care (ASC) colleagues, as only approximately 11% of children in receipt of an EHCP might go on to receive statutory ASC support. The cohort was changing and the number of individuals on vocational pathways was increasing, a shift from educational training. In January 2022, the total percentage of NEET for the cohort was 2.5%. This year was the first in a long time that 100% of children returned to their employment, education or training in September. In any year, there was also a small number of unknown children, which was reducing.

11. The Chairman asked what the Council was doing to attract staff with the appropriate skills. The Assistant Director shared that there had been significant turnover nationally with SEN teams. It was hoped that by the end of October 2022, the SEN teams would be fully staffed, following a period of recruitment. There were also national shortages with partners that they worked with, such as, educational psychologists. The Chairman asked about the additional school places. The Director explained that the 280 places from September 2022 were part of an additional 800 places through 35 schemes. This programme continued to be delivered over time.

12. Responding to a question on total number of specialist school places required, the Director explained that the intention was to have the majority of children’s needs met in maintained specialist provision. This would require 6,000 specialist places over a ten-year period, but this would continue to be reviewed. The aim was to come in line with the national average of 6.5% (currently at 14% in Surrey) of children receiving provision outside of mainstream schools.

13. A Member asked about the consequences of the gap in its capital funding bid allocation. The Director explained that the service was trying to reduce the gap and they had placed two bids for two additional free schools. An analysis was completed which showed the shortfall of funding and the options to bridge the remaining gap.

14. In response to a question on measuring the success of the Team Around the School pilot, the Director explained that specific measures had been formulated, such as, placement stability. It was expected that a report would come to the Board on the pilot, and a view would be taken on whether to adapt the pilot or establish it in its current form.

15. The Chairman asked whether travelling distance was taken into consideration when planning the locations of new placements. The Assistant Director reassured the Members that this was taken into consideration and the aim was for children to be located as close to home as possible. The Director for Education and Lifelong Learning added that the average distance from home for children with EHCPs was six miles, and exceptional cases of long distances brought the average up. The former Chief Executive of Family Voice Surrey shared that families and caseworkers were not well enough informed of the specificity of provision available in mainstream placements and therefore, strong parental preference affected placements of children.

16. The Chairman asked about the witnesses’ confidence that the Council were well prepared for the new local area SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) inspection framework. The Assistant Director explained that the Council was ready, and they were awaiting the publication of the final inspection framework. The Council had planned a programme of inspection preparation activity, which was underway and would continue until the inspection takes place.

Actions/requests for further information:

1. The Director of Education and Lifelong Learning to share a breakdown of the results of the last academic year of tribunal cases, including ways they were resolved prior to a tribunal and the distinction between partial and non-agreement by the end of November 2022.

2. The Director of Education and Lifelong Learning to share a table showing the phases of the programme of additional places with start and end points by the end of November 2022.

3. The Director of Education and Lifelong Learning to provide data on what proportion of SEND children are educated locally (within 10 miles from home) by the end of November 2022.

4. The Committee asks to receive the final draft Inclusion and Additional Needs Strategy, and the Additional Needs and Disabilities Partnership Board’s comments on this, in time for the Committee’s December meeting ahead of the strategy going to Cabinet.

RESOLVED:

1. The Select Committee notes the progress that continues to be made, as well as the ongoing challenges and the work underway to co-produce a refreshed strategy for 2023 to 2026.
2. The Chairman and Vice-Chairmen and Director of Education and Lifelong Learning to agree on the format of SEND performance data to be shared with the Committee.