Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Lee Wilkes.

RESOLVED: 

That the minutes of the meeting held on 16 November 2021 were agreed as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

The Chair invited those who wished to do so to declare interests in respect of items on the agenda.

No declarations were received.

At the Chair’s invitation the Assistant Director for Children provided a briefing on Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, highlighting the following:

i.            A key theme that had become clear was the need for co-production.  There was a wish to address this first so that everything undertaken was co-produced. 

ii.          Systems were in the process of being embedded and the Council was working with the SEND Ability Board.  They had not yet shared understanding around all of the partners as they wished to have a clear vision and agree priorities on which to base business.  The expectation of all partners would be linked to pathways and they also needed to look at the strategy and plan.

iii.         Co-production with families would change the way they worked with families as they wished to work with and not do things ‘to’ them.  Co-production would therefore take longer than expected because there would be more people involved.  The aim was to gain people’s confidence.

iv.         The Single Parent Carer Forums across the area had stated they would like just one forum for the whole area.  This would be embedded in the work.

v.          The SEND Accountability Board included representatives from all partners.  It met monthly and would begin co-production of the SEND Accountability Plan.

iv.         The SEND Accountability Board would split into two workstreams to oversee the operational functions by providing challenge and support.  It would then take recommendations to North Northamptonshire Council. 

v.          Initial data on SEND had been presented to the SEND Accountability Board across the North and West of the county.  It was being triangulated with feedback from parents and carers. 

vi.         There had been a sharp increase in the number of education healthcare plans by almost 300%.  COVID was partly responsible for the increase but there were also other factors like high needs funding.  There had also recently been an increase in the number of practitioners.

vii.        An additional 12 caseworkers had been employed in the SEND service.  Once a plan had been allocated to a child it stayed with them and this created a huge pressure on the service.  They were part of a pilot with disabled children to develop an outcome-based dashboard. 

In answer to queries on the update the following was confirmed:

viii.         It was acknowledged that the Service was struggling to meet the need.  Educational psychologists, health services, social care colleagues were all needed to go into schools and obtain information.  Getting responses to consultations was taking time. 

ix.           Some children required specialist provision and could not always get it and if providers could not provide it new providers would have to be sought.  This took time and could leave a family feeling frustrated.  They obviously wished to know what the wrap around care would look like and there was a need to communicate more consistently.  Even if it was just letting families know that the Service was still seeking a solution to address their needs at least it was contact.

x.            The number of Assessments  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

At the Chair’s invitation the Assistant Director of Children presented a briefing stating the following:

i.     High Needs Funding came from the Government’s Dedicated Schools Grant which was managed on behalf of schools through the School’s Forum.  An annual return had to be submitted to the Department of Education stating where and how it was spent. 

ii.    There was a £2.14million deficit at the beginning of the year, which was smaller than many other local authorities in the country.  However, the deficit for the end of the current year was expected to be above £3million.

iii.   There were a number of mitigations in place but there had been an unprecedented level of demand on the system.  These included out of county placements which had created a pressure of £1.5million.  £200k also came from pressure for support to children with SEN who were outside of school provision. 

iv.   Children who entered higher education with an Educational Healthcare Plan continued to be supported up to the age of 24 years. 

v.    It had been a priority to examine every line of the finances and there was now confidence that every line did link to a child correctly.  There was a great challenge around the Service Level Agreements in place with schools.

vi.   Some schools had named provision a ‘unit’ so that they could get funding. Some of these service level agreements would now have to be cancelled which would be a difficult conversation with those involved.  There was a need to match the needs of children with what a school could reasonably expect to offer and this might not always be a cash offer.  Sometimes it could be access to services.  Where a child had enduring needs, it was considered they should have an educational healthcare plan. 

In answer to queries on the briefing the following was confirmed:

vii.   In response to a question on how the position in North Northamptonshire compared to other councils, the Assistant Director of Children advised that she had previously been at a Council where there had been an excess deficit of over £10million.  Some local authorities had almost a 100% overspend in this area.  North Northamptonshire Council would continue to closely monitor finances.

viii.  There was a requirement to prepare a deficit recovery plan for the Department for Education and Scrutiny from members and the School’s Forum was welcomed.

ix.     It was not possible to identify another local authority with best practice in this area. An inspection produced a written statement of action rather than an Ofsted style rating.  The written statement of action was for all partners.

x.      In a year’s time they would be seeking agreement from the School’s Forum to move funding from the schools block into the high needs block of funding.  It was hoped that by that time the School’s Forum and partners would understand all of the issues.

xi.     The Assistant Director of Children would find out how many children were placed out of county and let Councillor Maxwell know  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

The Panel considered a copy of the forward plan attached as ‘item 6 on the agenda’.

RESOLVED:

That the latest Executive forward plan be noted.

RESOLVED that:-

The following be added to the forward list of items for presentation at future meetings by officers:

a.    More statistics on how many SEN children the Council looked after placed both inside and outside of the county.  How many of these children were not in school and if so how would education be provided?  How many speech therapists were going into schools and how many children were being seen by them?

b.    The next time the youth justice plan was brought for consideration, that this also include more statistics surrounding children who were involved with the police.

c.    A narrative on home schooled children, numbers and provision particularly how this may have increased resulting from Covid and how many children had returned to school thereafter. 

d.    That a presentation be provided by PROSPECT detailing the work being undertaken by, and in conjunction with, the Council to support young adults not in education, employment or training.

There being no further business the meeting closed at 6.30pm.