Minutes:
Question 1. Councillor Catherine Powell expressed concerns about nearly 12% of children lacking a named school by the statutory deadline and conflicting information from two secondary schools about their ability to meet needs. She requested direct correspondence with the schools and tracking data for the September 2025 cohort to monitor attendance and absences. The Cabinet Member recommended addressing specific cases directly with the schools and forwarding them to the service and accountable officer.
Question 2. Councillor Catherine Powell asked if the Cabinet Member could provide detailed information regarding how many pupils were allocated to each type of provision and how many pupils did not secure a placement for September 2024. The Cabinet Member agreed.
Question 3. Cllr Powell asked if the Cabinet Member could provide detailed information regarding how many pupils were allocated to each type of provision and how many pupils did not secure a placement for September 2024. The Cabinet Member said that she would provide that information. Rachael Wardell, the Executive Director for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, said that weekly updates were collected detailing key stage transfers, including the number of children without immediate school placements, categorised by type, and ongoing placement efforts, with a request for feedback to improve communication. The Chair requested that this information be distributed to the Committee.
Question 4. Cllr Powell asked if the Service could regularly share information about the number of appeals lodged against allocations advised to parents on 15 February. The Cabinet Member said she had asked the Service about the number of families wanting to lodge appeals against the named placement in their child's EHCP. She said it was too early to have a full picture and would take a few more weeks. The Executive Director explained parents could appeal at any time and suggested monthly or quarterly updates for accurate representation. The Chair agreed monthly or quarterly updates would be helpful.
Question 5. The Executive Director said she would provide a written response as to whether all 20 places at the Cullum Centre were Surrey County Council placements. Councillor Mark Sugden asked if, with no pupils ageing out and the number on roll being 20, Surrey County Council would make no placements for that academic year. He was told that if all places were allocated and no children left, no new allocations could be made unless alternative arrangements were negotiated.
Question 6. Councillor Jonathan Essex asked if it was possible to provide a comparative table by type of provision and by borough and district area for the numbers in independent, non-maintained schools.
Question 7. Cllr Essex asked if the comparative number for Surrey of pupils who were not in school, broken down by those not enrolled in any school, those receiving unregistered provision, and those enrolled at a school but not attending, could be provided. The Executive Director said she would review the report referenced in the original question and ensure that both Surrey and national data were provided where comparisons were possible, and clarify when such comparisons could not be made due to differences in data collection.