Agenda item

To update the Committee on progress with SEND. This will include the outcome of the service’s self-evaluation and latest performance data - Report enclosed.

Jane Carter, Disability and Professional Practice Manager introduced this item. In April 2019, Cabinet approved the SEND and Inclusion Strategy for the period 2019- 2023. This formed part of the strategic framework of the Warwickshire Education Strategy and replaced the Vulnerable Learners Strategy 2015-2018. The Strategy was co-produced and identified six priority areas. It was supported by a delivery plan and workstreams involving stakeholders. The strategy had been communicated via meetings and conferences, as well as through the distribution of a leaflet. It was monitored by the SEND and Inclusion Board.

The SEND Code of Practice 2015 set out the statutory framework and expectations, which included an expectation regarding education, health and care (EHC) plans. In July 2019, 4,090 children and young people had EHC plans in Warwickshire, which was an increase from 2,781 in 2014. A section of the report outlined performance across the SEND system. It included key activities and performance measures, which were summarised in the report with further information and data provided in an appendix.

The areas reported on were:

• Promoting Inclusion

• Getting it right for learners with high needs (school age)

• Improving health and social care for learners with SEND

• Preparing for adulthood

• Transport

• Workforce development

The report outlined plans for a peer review and an expected inspection of the SEND service. Warwickshire was one of four local authorities in the West Midlands yet to receive its SEND local area inspection. The inspection would take place by March 2021. So far, 45 of 91 inspections had resulted in a ‘Written Statement of Action’. The County Council had prepared for its inspection through regular updates to portfolio holders, strategic directors and the SEND & Inclusion Board. The key document for inspection was the local self-evaluation.

This was reviewed on a termly basis by the SEND & Inclusion Board. A peer review had been invited to focus on planning for EHC plans and the preparation for adulthood arrangements. This took place on 19 -20 September 2019. A verbal update was given, and the peer review had provided a useful rehearsal ahead of the inspection. The financial implications were reported. The implementation of the SEND & Inclusion Strategy was from within existing budgets across education, health and social care. The financial pressures on SEND were well documented nationally. The current forecast was that the high needs block was forecast to overspend by £4.3m 2019-06-18 CYP OSC minutes Page 5 of 12 in 2019/20, with a medium-term view that overspend would peak at £13.3m in 2021/22. In the government spending review 2019, a further £700m of funding would be provided nationally for high needs in 2020/21, although detail was awaited on the allocation for Warwickshire.

The Committee was reminded that the SEND Implementation Grant, with a current allocation of £261k over two years, was due to end in March 2020. Following a staffing restructure in Education Services, responsibility for mainstream and SEN transport had been separated. Forecast spend for SEN transport was over £9m. This was resourced from central Council funding, rather than the dedicated schools grant.

The following questions and comments were submitted by members with responses provided as indicated:

• Specialist provision in mainstream schools was a sensitive area. Reference was made to the cost saving measures in the report which would be a concern for parents of children reliant on these services. The County Council was currently an outlier in terms of the amount it spent on independent specialist provision and it was reliant on using such schools away from the county. The aim was to bring forward needs’ assessments earlier and to provide appropriate services within the County. The current specialist education did vary in quality, with one school being deemed inadequate in Ofsted terms.

• Extensive research in 2014 had shown that in general, parents would prefer that their children with additional needs went to the same local school as other local children. This approach had been a key part of the Council’s strategy and had been endorsed on several occasions by members. Young children having to travel long distances by taxi to specialist school provision was not helpful. There were gaps in specialist provision in Warwickshire’s mainstream schools. Additionally, some of the children currently in county specialist provision, who could be taught in mainstream schools also contributed to the need to use more remote specialist provision. Through resolving this it would reduce demand on the specialist provision, provide an improved service and cost less.

• It was asked if parents from Middlemarch School could meet with members to hear their views of the specialist services provided. The Chair suggested that this be discussed further by the Chair and party spokespeople.

• Officers were asked if the support provided in mainstream schools for those with additional needs was sufficient. The Special Educational Needs coordinator (SENCO) resources in some of the schools were on a part time basis and these specialists had limited capacity. Officers explained the arrangements for training and professional development of these staff and it had been noted that attendance levels at such events was declining. Clear guidance was provided to schools on the requirements they should meet for those with additional needs, such as pupils with autism. This guidance was being reviewed in a co-produced way to accord with the latest national guidelines. Other points were encouraging the use of advocacy and the provision of leaflets and other information to support parents.

• Questions were submitted about performance across the system, acknowledging that there had been some improvements in the last few years. However, there were still long waiting times for children with autism or ADHD to be assessed and placed in education with appropriate support. Communication between the schools and the CAMHS/RISE service could be improved and it was perceived that there was GP capacity for assessment.

These points were acknowledged, but there was no need for a formal diagnosis, before taking action. When a pupil had been identified as having additional needs, there was a requirement for schools to use their best endeavours to make appropriate provision.

• There was a lot of work taking place across the system to develop a new strategy and offer for those with autism and their families. An outline was given of the engagement being undertaken, the need to manage demands for the RISE service and the work between health, schools and education services. In terms of diagnosis, this was provided by the specialist mental health trust, which was at capacity. Whilst this was a national issue, it was being looked at actively for Warwickshire.

• From the school’s perspective if they were successful in delivering specialist education services, there were demands for additional placements, which had finance and other resource implications. Assurance was provided that schools would get the support they needed and there was a regular dialogue, particularly where they felt overburdened. Starting from a child centred/needs approach rather than services being planned within available resources was advocated. At a recent Department for Education listening event, the view expressed by many local authorities was that the current funding system wasn’t fit for purpose. The aim was for every geography to have at least one specialist resource provision and a good start had been made towards this objective. Reference was also made to educational psychology and the recruitment of a specialist officer. A child centred approach was being taken, but this would vary at each school and where poor practice was identified, it was challenged. • A question was asked about the County Council’s involvement with the Trinity Catholic School in Leamington and the specialist provision at Peter’s Place, which met the needs of learners with complex communication and social interaction difficulties. The County Council commissioned the specialist services and there was a programme of support for the first two years, including a specialist educational psychologist and teaching services. This was to provide development, with the leadership and management being the schools responsibility.

• A number of further concerns were raised regarding the Trinity Catholic School and particularly Peter’s Place regarding a lack of teacher job descriptions, concerns about capacity, safeguarding concerns and low staff to student ratios. These issues would be investigated, and the safeguarding concerns needed to be communicated clearly to officers for urgent follow up.

• Financial aspects were raised. It was uncertain how much additional funding would be received by the County Council. The anticipated national allocation was expected to be nearly £800 million. Warwickshire had previously received about one percent of the national allocation. This would address the current deficit, but not meet expected increases in demand. It was not clear if this would be annual additional funding, or a one-off amount. It was confirmed that the SEND transport costs were an additional cost. Reference was made to transport costs generally and whilst challenging, Warwickshire was better placed than many other local authorities.

Resolved

That the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee comments on the implementation of the SEND & Inclusion Strategy, as set out above.