EX140104-09

Division(s): N/A

EXECUTIVE – 14 JANUARY 2004

Report by the Chairman of the Review Group on SEN Panels

Introduction

This report describes the conclusions of the group set up under my chairmanship to review the operation of the Assessment and Resources Panels for children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) and results from a request by the Executive in May 2003. The Review Group comprises representatives from the Secondary and Primary Schools and Headteachers Associations, as well as the Principal Educational Psychologist and Senior Education Officer for SEN in the Learning & Culture Directorate. Members of the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee have also attended.

Background

At its meeting on 13 May 2003 the Executive considered a report by the independently-chaired Member Panel on the Inclusion in Mainstream Education of Children with SEN. It was agreed that a number of task groups should be set up to develop and consult informally on the proposals made by the Member Panel, one of which was a review of the operation of the panels of officers, headteachers and psychologists which consider issues of assessment of and resourcing for children with SEN. The intention was to seek improvements which would lead to greater transparency of, and confidence in, that significant part of the decision making process.

Also at the 13 May meeting the Executive considered a report that described the work and purpose of the panels in detail. This had been requested following earlier consideration of the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Review report on SEN. As a product of that report the Executive asked that the review of the SEN panels should be undertaken under my leadership since I had chaired the Members Panel on Inclusion and was willing to take on this task.

Review Group Proposals for the Future Operation of the Panels

The Review Group has examined the current legal basis, working practices and membership of the SEN panels. It has commissioned further research on practice in other authorities, considered how best to ensure that schools and parents can be consulted and framed recommendations on the composition and operation of the SEN panels. The legal and financial responsibilities of the LEA through its officers have also been considered.

The Review Group has accepted the desirability of having wider involvement in decision taking through a panel mechanism. Research by the Group has shown that most LEAs, in accordance with the SEN Code of Practice, use a very similar system with a similar membership. However, a number of changes have been discussed by the Group which it believes will lead to improvements in practice and increased confidence in the operation of the SEN panels.

(i) Key Principles

In particular, the Group recommend that there should be recognition of the following key principles:-

that the status of the panels is advisory to the Director for Learning and Culture;

that there is a need for the scrutiny of officer decisions to ensure consistency of practice and transparency of decision-making;

that dialogue between officers and parents and/or schools is essential for the effective working of the SEN processes and these lie largely outside the panel scrutiny process;

that parents have legal rights to meet officers, to seek independent conciliation and to appeal to a tribunal; and

that the need for confidentiality in the consideration of an individual child’s needs is paramount.

(ii) Composition of the Panels

The Group identified a number of issues around the need to ensure a sufficiently broadly-base input to and satisfactory scrutiny of the panels. The following principles were identified:

that an increased use of selected observers (eg county councillors, new headteachers, SEN Coordinators etc) would improve the transparency of the processes while at the same time providing valuable in-service training;

that external membership of the Panel should include representatives from the health sector (particularly nursing and paramedical services) and the Social & Health Care Directorate;

that an independent member should be co-opted to chair the panel to assist in enhancing confidence in the more streamlined processes and further ensure consistent and transparent decision-making;

that to ensure greater consistency of membership there is a need to address the difficulties faced by serving heads in regularly attending the panel meetings (headteachers are currently considering what improvements could be make in this regard); and

that the Oxfordshire Parent Partnership Coordinator should be invited to become a member of the Panel to ensure the parental perspective is fully recognised.

(iii) The Use of Guidelines

In February 2003 the Executive considered a detailed report on the use made of a "draft resources matrix" in the assessment and resource allocation process, following concerns raised about it in the SEN Scrutiny Review. The Executive, whilst noting the need to consider the circumstances of each individual case in making an assessment and any ensuing decision of the allocation of resources, agreed the use of guidelines based on the document, but asked for a report back on their use and effectiveness within 12 months.

The Review Group have included this issue in their deliberations, and have concluded that the matrix document should not be used as a reference point for decision making. Instead it is proposed that, together with schools and other representative bodies, a good practice guide should be established and circulated to schools to assist heads and SENCOs in understanding the wider issues implicit in the inclusion model. In the longer term this could evolve into a compendium of good practice.

(iv) Communication and Timescales

The Review Group welcomed improvements already in hand in this area, and particularly in the decreased time now taken to carry out and complete assessments. Particular aspects which the Group felt should be addressed were
:

the importance for officers, wherever possible, to communicate with parents in person or by telephone in cases where compliance with the parents’ preference appears unlikely, avoiding the impersonal first impression given by a standard format letter;

that officers should be expected to respond to parents and schools in writing within one week of the Panel meeting either notifying agreement to assess or setting out clear reasons why this was not agreed;

following the annual review of a statement, that officers need to respond within two weeks of the panel meeting to detail their recommendation to the parents and to the school, whilst recognising that in some cases legal requirements on consultation with governors or other circumstances may exceptionally make this impractical;

that schools require a clear proforma and further guidance on the submission of documentation following an annual review of a statement of SEN (this has now been drafted and will be sent to schools to trial in the New Year);

that there is potential for increased use of ICT to facilitate the administrative process and this should be kept under annual review, recognising that there are obvious cost implications.

RECOMMENDATION

The Executive is RECOMMENDED to note and endorse the findings of the Review Group as summarised in the report.

MARJORIE EVANS
Chairman of the Review Group on SEN Panels

Background Papers: Nil

January 2003

Return to TOP