Agenda item

The Chair noted their appreciation for the document's comprehensive nature, emphasising the "how to achieve each ambition" section's effectiveness.

The Director of Education and SEND presented the report, detailing its significance and importance, particularly regarding the review of feedback since the previous version was brough to the Select Committee in November 2022. The approach involved considering residents' and schools' input, indicating an attempt to address feedback constructively rather than in a tokenistic manner. It was highlighted that this was a local area approach, not a Council strategy.

Officers highlighted a shift in the strategy's approach, aiming to be more ambitious and having listened closely to the voices of children, families, and professionals involved in SEND. Emphasising the importance of children's perspectives, efforts had been made to capture their experiences and opinions on early interventions and the flexibility of support within school settings.

This strategy had been scrutinised and positively received by the SEND Executive Partnership Board, reflecting collaboration among various stakeholders (including Health and Social care, education, parents/ careers, and voluntary organisations). However, challenges arose from schools, citing concerns about increasing levels of inclusion and the pressures to adapt to varying needs, leading to a discussion about finding a balance between inclusive practices and acknowledging the challenges faced by schools.

In summary, the five ambitions were:

1.    The right support, at the right time, in the right place: this was about early intervention and meeting need earlier. For example, young people fed back that they felt they should not need an EHCP in order to get support. Also, not all children wanted a Teaching Assistant supporting them.

2.    Fully inclusive education for all

3.    Provision meets the needs of Hillingdon’s children and young people: this involved looking at the spectrum of provision – not just special school places, but also in mainstream schools, SRPs and designated units. It was noted that young people were positive about SRPs.

4.    Children and young people live happy and fulfilled lives where they are included in the community: this referred to outcomes outside of education. It was typically quite difficult for families with children with particularly complex SEND to access clubs, and so this ambition aimed to assist with this.

5.    There is a flexible offer and range of interventions available for children to access Alternative Provision: this was important because there was pressure on schools which could lead to disruption and exclusions, so this ambition aimed to avoid exclusions where possible. This would provide outreach and inreach as well as alternative provision places.

The discussion revolved around the SEND strategy's ambitious goals and the importance of translating these ambitions into tangible outcomes. Members highlighted the importance of monitoring the strategy's outcomes. Concerns were voiced about funding, suitability of placements, and varying percentages of EHCPs (Education, Health, and Care Plans) across schools. There was a shared consensus on the necessity to closely monitor the strategy's progress and outcomes.

Officers acknowledged these concerns, assuring a monitoring system through priority groups around each ambition within the strategy. Regarding EHCP distributions across schools, efforts were underway to consult with schools that had lower EHCP levels, intending to foster more inclusive practices among all schools. The emphasis remained on the strategy's aim to support children's diverse needs while addressing challenges faced by schools and parents in selecting schools.

Members commended the report’s comprehensiveness, in particular around the data representation and the holistic approach towards children’s needs and emphasised the importance of not labelling children negatively.

Furthermore, attention was drawn to a notable trend concerning higher percentages of children with primary needs in autism and language categories within the borough. Officers noted the rising national trend of ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and attributed it partly to better access to diagnosis and the increasing complexity of ASD cases diagnosed at earlier ages, emphasising the necessity for early interventions. Efforts were ongoing to understand these trends further and ensure a more equal provision across different types of needs.

The discussion highlighted the importance of a comprehensive strategy that addressed diverse needs while balancing the challenges faced by educational institutions, striving for equitable provision and support for children with special educational needs.

Officers noted ongoing initiatives and projects aimed at various aspects of SEND support. Some projects, such as updating the banding model and matrix of funding for SEND, were expected to show progress sooner, while others, like developing increased inclusion, were perceived as longer-term goals requiring continuous collaboration with schools.

Additionally, the discussion touched upon preparing children with special needs for adulthood, highlighting the challenges in providing experiences similar to those of children without SEND, such as managing budgets or using public transport. There was a recognition of crosswork among social care, SEND, education, and adult social care services, aiming to support the transition to adulthood, ranging from independent travel programs to employment opportunities. This collaborative effort aimed to strengthen the support network for children in fostering a seamless transition into adulthood.

Members asked about benchmarking SEND outcomes against statistical neighbours and London boroughs rather than solely against national standards. Officer noted that this was possible, and that OFSTED tended to look at national figures as well.

The conversation touched upon the SEND Inclusion Plan pilot of 31 local authorities, which did not include Hillingdon. Why certain local authorities were selected for the pilot and others not was uncertain.

The conversation shifted to concerns about capacity and specialist staff to meet SEND needs. Efforts were discussed to enhance training and provide support to ensure staff confidence in catering to diverse SEND requirements. In addition, there would be support for the Council’s different teams to act in a One Council approach.

Another topic discussed was the ongoing need for feedback mechanisms to drive continuous improvement in SEND provision. There were plans to encourage feedback through various forums such as the Child Voice Panel, Children in Care Council and Parent Carer Forum, to engage children with SEND, and efforts to share good practices and effective training methods across settings. It was important to share the child’s voice with partners. It was also important that schools and teams could learn from each other.

The conversation also addressed the quality of data tracking and funding issues within the SEND system. Challenges in managing data accurately were acknowledged. The potential for new systems to be used was being investigated. There was a continuous struggle to manage funding amid growing demands and pressures on resources with a fixed budget. There had been some inconsistency in the funding approach, and this was one reason for the banding review. This was also linked to ambition one and why early intervention was so important.

Members highlighted past challenges in SEND provision regarding EHCP delivery and the shortage of local specialist provision, with a higher number of children placed in independent settings. Officers noted this was something that a lot of local authorities had struggled with and that Hillingdon had come a long way with EHCP compliance outcomes. On special school places, officers clarified that on one level it appeared that there were not enough places but actually the number of children in a specialist placement was above national levels in Hillingdon. The reason for that was because Hillingdon was placing more than double the national rate in independent settings that were high cost rather than in local provision. So as far as having a shortage, it was more around local specialist provision rather than not having enough places for children.

Members raised concerns about delays in funding reaching schools for SEND support. Officers clarified that a number of schools experienced issues at the end of the previous financial year and beginning of the current financial year.  Assurance was provided that efforts were underway to rectify configuration issues and only a small proportion of reconciliation was outstanding. New systems were noted to streamline the process for timely funding allocation.

It was clarified that the Hillingdon PCF was the Parent Carer Forum.

Lastly, the meeting concluded with gratitude for the dedication of officers in navigating the complexities of SEND provision and ongoing efforts to improve support and address various challenges faced within the system.

RESOLVED: That the Committee:

1.    Noted the contents of the draft Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Strategy 2023-2028 which outlines the strategic vision and priorities for the delivery of SEND Services across the borough; and

2.    Delegated to the Democratic Services Officer, in conjunction with the Chair (and in consultation with the Opposition Lead) comments for inclusion in the upcoming Cabinet Member report.