Agenda item

A presentation on Corporate Risk 7.7 (If the current demand for Education Health Care (EHC) Needs Assessment and updating of EHC Plans after annual review exceeds available capacity of staff within SEND Services (Particularly educational psychology and SEN Officer) then this leaves the Council vulnerable to complaints of maladministration with regards to statutory timescales.  The situation is worsened by a lack of specialist placements which means that children with complex needs may not be placed in a timely way and hence may not receive the support to which they are entitled through their EHC Plan) will be provided as part of this item.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources which presented the Corporate Risk Register for approval and provided an update on the Counter Fraud initiatives.  The Committee also received a presentation on Corporate Risk 7.7 (If the current demand for Education Health Care (EHC) Needs Assessment and updating of EHC Plans after annual review exceeds available capacity of staff within SEND Services (Particularly educational psychology and SEN Officer) then this leaves the Council vulnerable to complaints of maladministration with regards to statutory timescales.  The situation is worsened by a lack of specialist placements which means that children with complex needs may not be placed in a timely way and hence may not receive the support to which they are entitled through their EHC Plan) as part of this item.  A copy of the report and presentation slides marked ‘Agenda Item 12’ is filed with these minutes.

Presentation – Corporate Risk 77 (EHC Plans)

(i)               Three key factors gave rise to this risk: a national shortage in educational psychologists, a lack of staff capacity to meet the increasing demand for EHC Plans and to conduct the annual reviews of those Plans, and a shortage of specialist placements.

(ii)             Capital funding from the Department for Education and the County Council had been allocated to provide, over the last 4 years, approximately 550 additional placements.  However, due to the continued rise in demand, 400 placements still had to be purchased from external providers which were expensive. 

(iii)            Focus within the Department had been on ensuring that specialist provision was provided only to those that needed it most.  Others were supported within mainstream schools with added wrap around support provided by the Council.

(iv)           Mainstream schools had a responsibility to educate children and received SEND funding directly from the Government to meet that need.  This was the same for both academies and maintained schools.  The Council received High Needs Block SEND funding to support those children that could not have their needs met in a mainstream setting and so had to attend specialist provision.   

(v)             Ideally, an additional 50 to 60 additional educational psychologists would be needed locally to meet the level of demand for EHC Plans.  However, there were no resources to support this level of capacity.  Locally there were currently 8 educational psychologist vacancies and recruiting to these positions was proving difficult.  Nationally this was an issue and so all Childrens Social Care authorities were experiencing similar pressures and competing for this same resource.

(vi)           To undertake EHC Plan assessments and the annual reviews as required by regulations, the Department would need a further £1.2m in growth funding to meet demand.  However, given the current financial pressures faced by the Council which had a £33m funding gap, this could not be met without additional funding from the Government. Members expressed concern that there appeared to be no change in the Government’s funding approach for SEND which left councils and families in a very difficult position.

(vii)          As part of the Council’s Transforming SEND in Leicestershire (TSIL) programme, work was being done to find a more efficient way of carrying out EHC Plans and annual reviews, and to ensure that only those children that needed an EHC Plan were assessed in the first instance.  This required significant engagement with parents and schools.  Through the TSIL programme a lot of work had been undertaken with schools regarding inclusive practices and support provided for children who were struggling but did not have an EHC Plan.  Members noted that some 10,000 children were supported in this way through mainstream schools.  To push this work further, more capacity was needed within the Department.

(viii)        The Director confirmed that the Department provided input when new schools were built to advise on how spaces could be designed to be more inclusive. 

(ix)           Members noted that the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee looked at progress in the Department’s delivery of the TSIL Programme regularly and work undertaken with schools more generally.

Corporate Risk Register

(x)         Members commented that the removal of risk 4.2 regarding Arriva and the risk of a concessionary travel appeal was to be welcomed.

(xi)       The reduction in the likelihood of the risk relating to the current cost of living crisis risk was questioned.  It was noted that this had been based on the reduction in inflation which had reduced the risk generally.

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the current status of the strategic risks facing the County Council be approved;

(b)  That the presentation on corporate risk 7.7 relating to SEND and EHC Plans be noted and a copy of the presentation slides circulated to Committee Members after the meeting;

(c)   That the update regarding counter fraud be noted.