Agenda item

Cllr John Howson, Cabinet Member for Children, Education, and Young People’s Services, Cllr Kate Gregory, Cabinet member for SEND Improvement, and Lisa Lyons, Director of Children’s Services, have been invited to present an update report on the SEND Priority Action Plan.  Kate Reynolds, Deputy Director of Education, Joanna Hoskin, Senior Youth Worker, and Dan Leveson, the BOB Integrated Care Board’s Director of Place (Oxfordshire), have also been invited to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

Cllr John Howson, Cabinet Member for Children, Education, and Young People’s Services, Cllr Kate Gregory, Cabinet member for SEND Improvement, and Lisa Lyons, Director of Children’s Services, were invited to present an update report on the SEND Priority Action Plan.  Kate Reynolds, Deputy Director of Education, Deborah Smit, Head of SEND, Joanna Hoskin, Senior Youth Worker, and Dan Leveson, the BOB Integrated Care Board’s Director of Place (Oxfordshire), were also invited to answer the Committee’s questions.

Stephen Chandler, Executive Director of People and Transformation (Deputy Chief Executive), was also present for this agenda item.

The Head of SEND led the presentation, focusing on strengthening leadership and fostering cultural change. She highlighted efforts to build relationships with families and professionals, such as regular meetings with the Oxfordshire Parent Carer Forum to improve communication. Challenges were discussed, including financial constraints and the high demand for special school places. The presentation also emphasised early intervention and co-production with families and professionals. The Head of SEND outlined the governance structure, including the SEND Improvement and Assurance Board and various theme groups dedicated to specific areas of SEND provision.

Following the presentation there was a brief adjournment to resolve technical problems in the meeting room.

Cllr Corkin left the meeting following the presentation.

The Senior Youth Worker set out that the SEND Youth Forum, which had been launched in June 2024, aimed to engage young so that they could influence services and policies that affect them. It allowed young people to voice opinions, share experiences, and participate in decision-making. Plans for the forum included making a short video to promote the forum and increasing participation in strategic discussions.

Members of the Committee raised a number questions and comments on the SEND Priority Action Plan and the associated presentation, including the following:

·       Members raised concern about timely responses to enquiries on the directorate’s part, whether received from service users or from members.

The heard that the Council was committed to enhancing communication efficiency and tracking, ensuring that there were timely and high-quality responses to enquiries.  The Committee was advised that there had been a significant improvement in response time to enquiries, comparing July 2023 to July 2024, showing a decrease from an average of 31 working days to nine working days. This indicated a more efficient and timely communication process with stakeholders.

All enquiries, including those from councillors and parents, were expected to be acknowledged and assurances were made that outgoing communications were quality assured before being issued, indicating a robust tracking and quality control system for communications.

·       Members explored how young people’s views were engaged with and whether the widest range of voices, from a variety of settings, was sought.

Officers stressed the need to capture young people's voices both inside and outside traditional school settings. Engaging with youth directly and through forums was essential to understand their views and needs.

The SEND Youth Forum was a business-as-usual mechanism for hearing young voices and played an important role in ongoing engagement and decision-making.  Members were reminded that there was no spokesperson or representative of the forum; it was a collection of equals with different opinions on most matters and it allowed for broad, collective youth engagement.

The Committee emphasised its keenness to co-opt young people to the places permitted by the Committee’s terms of reference as soon as possible.

·       There was a discussion about how the High Needs funding arrangements.

The Director of Children Services emphasised that there had been increased demand across a range of specialist services, including demand for Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs).  Efforts to understand the reasons for this increase were ongoing. The research included using Delivering Better Value outcomes and analysing demand based on demographic and population changes.

The conversation highlighted the importance of focusing on early intervention and prevention to manage demand more efficiently. This strategy was considered vital for tackling the underlying reasons behind the rise in EHC Needs Assessments and high needs block figures.

·       Concerns were noted regarding the response rate to complaints and queries, and whether the report accurately reflected service performance compared to similar authorities.

Although the data was incomplete, it showed improvements over the past year. Comparing this data to other authorities was not possible at the time, but efforts were underway to enhance the tracking of complaints and queries. This improved tracking would be included in a monthly progress report.

·       Concerns were raised about the perceived lack of transparency regarding the SEND Improvement Board's work, particularly in terms of the availability of minutes and detailed updates beyond the provided blog posts.

It was explained that the SEND Improvement Board meetings were operational rather than strategic and focused on the business of work and accountability to the Department for Education (DfE). The meetings were about establishing work plans and evaluating progress against the improvement plan, which might not always translate into detailed public minutes.

Despite the operational focus, there was an acknowledgment of the need to find ways to be more transparent and to communicate the board's work more effectively to the public. Discussions were ongoing about how best to achieve this.

·       It was noted that the rate of appeals to the First Tier Tribunal (SEND) had been a concern, and members questioned why Oxfordshire might be experiencing a higher rate of tribunal cases compared to other areas. The Committee explored whether the service should be more selective in the appeals it challenges, to speed up progress through the backlog.

The selection of cases to challenge at tribunals was discussed as a complex issue, with the need for a strategic approach to decide which cases were challenged based on specific criteria. The financial aspect of tribunals was touched upon, indicating concerns about the cost associated with tribunal cases. However, specific figures regarding the level of spending on tribunals were not immediately available.

The rise in tribunal cases was attributed to systemic issues within the SEND system, and more complex and numerous needs among children. A significant increase in EHCP requests had also driven this trend, along with the growing need for special educational support.

The significant backlog in tribunal cases was addressed alongside broader challenges in the SEND system, emphasising early intervention and support to potentially lower the number of cases reaching tribunals.

·       The quality and efficiency of the speech and language therapy service was also questioned, with concerns over growing delays within the service.

The BOB Integrated Care Board’s Director of Place (Oxfordshire) recognised problems within the speech and language therapy service, highlighting a national shortage of therapists. Combined with rising demand for these services, worries about demand vastly exceeding supply prompted the need for a comprehensive service review.

·       While the performance of enhanced pathways was praised, there were concerns about the sustainability of the practice and whether funding could be better used on other programmes.

The necessity for sustainable models for Enhanced Pathways for children with complex SEND needs was recognised. The focus was on creating these stable pathways to support mainstream placements for these children.

Partner collaboration, especially with schools, was seen as critical for the success of Enhanced Pathways. Engaging with school leaders to identify schools with new Year Seven pupils with EHCPs, and supporting these schools, was highlighted as essential.

It was stressed that schools and the Council should collectively understand budget timelines and decisions. This understanding was crucial for timely decisions impacting the sustainability and implementation of Enhanced Pathways.