Agenda item

Jane Seymour introduced the report (Agenda Item 11) which provided an indication of the savings opportunities arising from the SEND Strategy 2018/23 and sought approval in principle for continued resourcing of the SEND Strategy Officer post, the Therapeutic Thinking Officer post, the ASD Team posts and the increased Vulnerable Children’s Grant, as there were deemed essential to achieve long term savings in the High Needs Block (HNB).

Jane Seymour reported that she had been requested to provide a report that attempted to project savings going forward as a result of implementation of the SEND Strategy. The report set out each of the objectives within the SEND Strategy and assessed potential cost savings associated with each one. The report included background to the SEND Strategy, which had been in place for two years. The aim of the Strategy was to provide the best possible services with children with SEND as locally as possible and to improve life outcomes. Services also needed to be provided in a cost effective way and this was a theme throughout the Strategy.

The report looked at each of the objectives within the Strategy in detail and attempted to make assumptions about savings for each one. The detail on this was set out from page 137 of the report.  

Page 147 of the report included a table, which detailed the total potential savings for the High Needs Block (HNB) if all the measures set out section four of the report were taken over the seven year period of the SEND Strategy. The total estimated reduction in spend, as a result of implementing the Strategy over the seven years was £1.7 million. Jane Seymour explained that this would only be a net reduction if demand across other areas of the HNB was retained and everything remained the same. It however, had to be considered that there could be continued growth in pressure against other areas of the budget.

Jane Seymour reported it would be recommended as part of the budget setting process for the HNB that invest to save initiatives, which had been originally been agreed for one year, should be allowed to continue. These were critical to reducing spend. A more detailed report on the HBN budget including proposals, would be brought to the next meeting of the Schools’ Forum in December 2020.

Jane Seymour drew attention to the recommendation under section 2.2 of the report, which was seeking agreement to make the SEND Strategy Officer a permanent post. The position was currently recruited to on a three year basis. The current post holder was leaving for a permanent role and Jane Seymour stressed that it was particularly difficult to recruit and retain staff for short term posts. The role was critical to driving the Strategy forward and achieving savings.

Hilary Latimer referred to Jane Seymour’s recommendation to make the SEND Strategy Officer a permanent position and queried if there would be any employment law implications involved in the matter. Jane Seymour confirmed that the current member of staff had been seconded from a permanent role within the authority and although was leaving because the post was short term, they did have a permanent substantive role to return to.

Gemma Piper noted that the item was titled ‘a long term view of the High Needs Block (HNB) and impact of the SEN Strategy’ and noted that the SEND Strategy was just an element of the HNB. She queried how the savings achieved by the SEND Strategy would sit within the wider plan for the HNB. Ian Pearson commented that the budget monitoring report later on the agenda highlighted that the deficit was in excess of £1.7m potential saving referred to by Jane Seymour, which could possibly be achieved through implementation of the strategy. Ian Pearson reported that West Berkshire was in a similar situation to many other local authority areas regarding the HNB. This had been recognised by the Department for Education (DfE) and the struggles faced to bring budgets back into balance. As a result the DfE wanted to hold discussions with local authorities during 2020 about possible ways forward. Ian Pearson commented that one of the biggest issues faced was that the amount of money coming through the system was not enough and as a result of this being recognised by the DfE there had been an increase in SEN funding. 

Ian Pearson explained that alongside invest to save proposals, historically a menu of saving options had been also formed. Cuts had been made significantly in the past. Recently focus had moved away from cutting services because it has been argued that some of the cuts implemented had been counterproductive. This signified the complexity of the area of work. In recent years the deficit had been driven by increased numbers of children requiring specialist provision, including an increase in children requiring Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs). Ian Pearson stated that some savings options would need to be brought to the next round of meetings in November/December. Ian Pearson added that there was the other issue of charging schools for particular services such as for Learning and Literacy support. This had been done in the past however, had resulted in decreased take-up of placements. All issues would need to be looked at collectively and possible ways to solve them.

Charlotte Wilson raised a question regarding HLTAs for ASD and the spend to save initiative for this area. She asked if recruitment was taking place for the teacher post as well or had the two ASD TAs replaced this post. Jane Seymour confirmed that the teacher role would be recruited too as well as the two ASD TA positions.

Charlotte Wilson raised a further query regarding resource unit funding.  It was noted that this area had not been mentioned and she hoped that this would be included when the HNB was considered more generally. Ian Pearson confirmed that this would be included in discussions at the next round of meetings.

Finally Charlotte Wilson queried Therapeutic Thinking. She noted that this was detailed heavily in the SEND Strategy however, it had been highlighted at the secondary heads meeting that not all schools had bought into it and therefore this was a concern. In response to Charlotte Wilson’s point, Michelle Sancho reported that even if schools had not bought into the Therapeutic Thinking approach or undertaken training they would be able to access funding available and therefore all schools were still able to benefit. In representing secondary heads, Charlotte Wilson stated that they would not be in support of a criteria that had to be met in order to access funding.

David Ramsden concurred with the points raised by Charlotte Wilson. The issue was that it was difficult to know how much to cut and by when and therefore it was difficult to put a deficit recovery plan in place. David Ramsden asked if there was any clarification from the DfE regarding how long discussions with local authority areas would take, otherwise a difficult situation was being faced as it was unknown how deep cuts needed to be made. Ian Pearson stated that it was currently unclear in terms of what would be expected however, it was hoped that there would some answers by December however, it was possible that there would not be clarity in time for the next Heads Funding Group and Schools’ Forum.

Ian Pearson further commented that in the past the approach taken had included giving consideration to areas that could deliver savings through investment and also looking at areas where potential savings could be made. A judgment would then need to be made on which of these approaches should be taken. 

Gemma Piper queried if the proposals outlined in the report around savings would balance the budget in year for the SEND element of the HNB. Ian Pearson drew attention to the budget monitoring report where it could be seen the budget had been set for the current year and figures suggested that there was a £200k overspend against the deficit budget. Ian Pearson did not see that it would be possible to bring the budget back into balance for 2021/22. It would however, be possible to plan to reduce the deficit.

The Chairman invited member of the Forum to consider the recommendation under 2.2 of the report to make the SEND Strategy Officer a permanent position. Jon Hewitt proposed that this be agreed and this was seconded by Chris Prosser. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the recommendation under 2.2 of the report to make the SEND Strategy Officer a permanent position was agreed by the Schools’ Forum.