SCN0481

Written evidence from Northumberland County Council

 

 

Introductory Comments

  1. It is clear that the lines of inquiry are some of the most challenging aspects of the new SEND legislation. The statutory duties placed upon Local Authorities in relation to post school education have increased rapidly from the previously well-established processes managed by the Learning Skills Council as was. At the time of the transfer of duties to Local Authorities some staff were transferred over to the Local Authorities in order to support this process. This coincided with the Government austerity measures which resulted in Local Authorities being required to offer redundancy to staff. Within the Tyne and Wear and Northumberland area all of these staff who transferred have left the Local Authorities and the this loss of this experience combined with the significant financial strain on special needs has led to significant issues. The situation has been further compounded by the new SEND code of practice, where the areas relating to post 16 and more particularly post 19 education are too vague and open to different interpretation by all those involved in the system, including parents, schools, colleges, educational professionals, health and social care staff and tribunal judges. This vagueness has also led to different interpretation of entitlement from authority to authority and increasing pressure in relation to complaints and tribunals.

 

Executive Summary

 

  1. Assessment and Support The need for greater clarity over when to assess, appropriate outcomes, when to cease, expectation from the tribunal service and the appeals process and what is progression
  2. Transition from statements and LDAs to EHCPs No issues
  3. The level of SEND Funding Pressures due to Post 19 continued provision, Specialist College provision, lack of ESFA scrutiny, impact on other High Needs Learners.
  4. The roles and cooperation between education, health and social care sectors Transition arrangements between children and adult services and education provision being used to address gaps.
  5. Provision for 19-25 year olds The importance of preparing from an earlier age, transition planning, clarity over apparent contradictions within the current code of practice in relation to progression, substantial qualifications

 

Terms of Reference

 

Assessment of and support for children and young people with SEND

 

  1. As stated the guidance is not clear. The process for requesting a new assessment is clear in that it is the same pre and post 16. What is not always clear is when an ECHP assessment is required or following an assessment in what circumstances an ECHP is issued. A young adult may clearly have needs which would require support if they remained in education but what is not clear is why they would need to remain in education or return back into education. Clearly potential outcomes would be an important determining factor.  The Northern Local Authorities have accessed shared outcomes training delivered by “Preparing for Adulthood” but this did not provide any further clarity on this issue. At what point in a young person’s life do the outcomes for them in life cease to be truly educational. Northumberland County Council has experience of a recent tribunal decision where a young person of 22 with profound learning difficulties, CHC funding, full-time residential support, operating at low P levels, studying entry level 1 units, resulted in the judge ordering the LA to maintain the EHCP. Clearly the outcomes for this young person are not going to change the course of her life. They will still require full support around all basic life tasks, full time supervision. The LA would always hope that this young person would continue to make very small steps of progress throughout their life in the specialist adult care provision they will be provided with, but the provision made for in the future is not going to change by their EHCP being maintained. The costs of an educational programme are significantly higher than the adult care provision made by this organisation despite the contents being very similar in nature.
  2. As part of the appeal the family were able to access legal aid which not only supported the completion of appeal documents but then also resulted in the legal representatives being able to commission assessment reports from an occupational therapists, SALT, physiotherapist and Educational Psychologist. The LA does not have the resources in order to commission reports to counter these reports and although these professionals claim to be independent the evidence presented is clearly heavily slanted to support the appeal. The judge advised that if the Local Authority wished to contest the recommendations of these therapist then they would have to also commission the same range of professionals. This is simply not possible and this cannot be an appropriate use of resources in the current financial climate.
  3. In many appeal cases legal firms arrange for a range of therapists and an educational therapist to provide assessments and recommendations and these reports are then used to justify amendments within the “working document” for the tribunal. In essence this appears to be a re-assessment carried out by the families legal representatives but with a predetermined outcome of the assessment. The provision and placement have been determined before the assessments have been undertaken. The legal process associated with the statutory process would also benefit from being reviewed.

 

The transition from statements of special educational needs and Learning Disability Assessments to Education, Health and Care Plans

 

  1. Northumberland County Council completed the transition from LDAs and statements to EHCP within the required timescales but as with many Local Authorities the production of clear, aspirational, but realistic outcomes has been challenging. The more holistic nature of EHCPs has the potential to ensure that a more joined up and collective approach is in place to ensure young adults needs are met.

 

The level and distribution of funding for SEND provision

 

  1. Northumberland County Council has faced increasing pressures in relation to SEND finance. Pressure factors include the increasing number of requests for assessments, the increasing number of requests for special school places, the difficulty of ensuring that Post 19 learners leave education at an appropriate time. Northumberland County Council, along with neighbouring Local Authorities, also has the added difficulty of a large, highly resourced specialist provision offering education for an increasing number of pupils of school age and college age. The fees for this organisation are substantially higher than the costs of Local Authority provision. The provider employs a large number of staff, regularly increases individual pupil’s fees based on their view of need and also is in the process of introducing whole scale fee uplifts for all students.
  2. With regards to Post 16 and Post 19 the provider in many occasions identifies very small step progress and continues to identify further study programmes at the same level of previous study programmes. This organisation, along with other Post 19 organisations, are part funded from resources allocated by the Education Skills Funding Agency (ESFA). Northumberland County Council has made inquiries as to whether the ESFA carries out any monitoring or audit of the use of these resources and to whether any providers are challenged when they submit Individual Learner Returns which clearly show that learners are studying at the same level as before. The response the Council received stated that this was not an issue for the ESFA but an issue for the LA to address. It was also highlighted that progression would be an issue which Ofsted would review.
  3. The funding impact of Post 19 education is impacting on the funding available to meet the needs of pupils with SEND in school. Northumberland County Council regrettably had to seek Secretary of State permission in order to transfer 1% of funding from the School’s Block to the High Needs Block in order to address part of this shortfall.

 

The roles of and cooperation between education, health and social care sectors

 

  1. Again this is a significant challenge. All services are stretched, both financially and staffing wise. The statutory entitlement to education until 18 means that families and young people are needing to deal with a whole range of transitions with multiple services all at the same time. In addition to leaving school, if the pupil chose to remain in school to complete 6th form, transition from children to adult health and social care services can be very difficult. The added difficulty is that increasingly young people are accessing therapies as part of their education provision. It is often very clear to families that in most cases these therapies will not continue once they leave education. With that in mind parents often want their children to remain in education to maintain this health provision. When one Local Authority disputed this as being a valid reason for remaining in education the tribunal sided with parents.
  2. With regards to social care, again there is a transition, often incorporating a re-assessment of need.

 

Provision for 19-25-year olds including support for independent living; transition to adult services; and access to education, apprenticeships and work

 

  1. The current SEND Code of Practice highlights the need to prepare for adulthood at the earliest opportunity but no later than the Year 9 annual review. Under the previous Code of Practice there was the expectation that a transition plan would be prepared at this review to support the statement. This transition plan could in many instances be a positive planning and focusing tool but this appears to be lost.
  2. Clearer guidance would be beneficial on the focus of education from Year 9 and when education should remain beyond 19. Section 9.152 refers to consolidating learning but this appears to be at odds with section 8.32 which refers to stretch and progression. Section 8.32 also refers to programmes enabling studying at a higher level and rigorous, substantial qualifications. Is entry level 1 a substantial qualification? Is entry 1 award a higher level of qualification than entry level certificate? Section 8.32 also refers to not repeating learning but consolidation of learning is often is repeating learning.
  3. Greater clarity on the definition of substantial qualifications, stretch and progression and learning at a higher level would be helpful.
  4. Where young people have complex needs focusing on independence skills and independent living skills only up to 19 might lead to better outcomes and less drift. If it was clearly expected that the focus of continued education beyond 19 was employment, whether this is independent work, supported employment, job carving or volunteering, with programmes including recognised qualifications to support this, then providers would again be more focused on delivering outcomes. This should be supported by high quality independent impartial advice and guidance.
  5. Northumberland County Council would be more than willing to provide additional information on the issues raised within this submission and also would be prepared to attend any meetings where it was felt we could support the work of the select committee.

 

Recommendations

 

  1. The area of Post 16 education but more specifically Post 19 education is one requiring clearer statutory guidance. The current statutory guidance does not support the needs of young people, their parents or carers, Local Authorities or education establishments. The current position generates additional work for Local Authorities, education providers and the tribunal service and generates additional costs to the public purse in managing the dispute resolution process, in particularly the tribunal process and the costs incurred through legal aid to support appeals.
  2. We recommend that the select committee consider the issues highlighted within the executive summary

 

June 2018