Agenda item

Purpose: To present the findings of the recent Ofsted and CQC thematic review of children with SEND, of compulsory school age, who are not registered pupils at a registered independent school or any type of state-funded school.

Neil Goddard (Service Director - Education and SEND) presented the Ofsted and CQC Thematic Review Into Children Who Are Not in School (Agenda Item 8).

The following points were raised in the debate:

·       Members noted that some children were being diagnosed as SEND when all they actually needed was support with school readiness and socialisation. Officers stressed that early intervention was key. Parents were being encouraged to take up their early years entitlement. Lots of work was being done around the transition into primary schools, and work was ongoing with schools to delivery early interventions that kept children in mainstream schools where they would achieve the best outcomes.

·       Members noted that the report appeared to indicate support for parents had decreased over time. It was suggested that support from health visitors and the Family Hubs was key. Officers agreed about the importance of health visitors. Signposting to local services had improved, so parents could find appropriate support. Also, take-up of the early years offer delivered significant benefits. In addition, family hubs were being developed to deliver support to a broader age range of children. The decrease in support mentioned in the report referred to the historic situation, but the focus was now moving back to early intervention, early years and early help.

·       Concern was expressed that parents who were not online might not be aware of the local offer, and that more active support may be required. It was confirmed that the local offer was aimed at professionals, so they could alert parents they worked with, as well as through local libraries and family hubs. It was acknowledged that there were still hard to reach families who may not be engaged, but strategies were being put in place to reach them.

Action: Officers to bring an update on the family hubs to a future meeting of the CYP Scrutiny Committee.

·       Members noted that the report had flagged concerns about a lack of a clear strategy for alerting professionals across agencies about children not in education. Officers provided assurance that they were working more closely with colleagues in health and social care through the Strategic SEND Board, so the right professionals were informed and involved. Appropriate training and support were also being provided.

·       Officers were asked if there were areas of good practice that had not been implemented in West Berkshire. It was acknowledged that the Council could do more around joint commissioning and officers highlighted that an advert was out for a new joint commissioner post.

·       Members noted that the report had flagged difficulties experienced by parents in accessing therapy support and asked about the planned system review. Officers explained that existing commissioned therapy services did not make provision for children who were not at school. However, this gap would be addressed as services were recommissioned. Any issues regarding waiting lists would need to be referred to the Integrated Care Board for response.

·       Concern was expressed about children not in education who were presenting at the crisis service with acute mental health needs, having not being identified earlier. Officers explained that the Dynamic Support Register was used to identify children at risk of escalating to Tier 4 services and to ensure they received timely support. This was reviewed by a panel of professionals that included representation by colleagues in Education and Children’s Social Care and allowed for effective planning across agencies. Members asked to see data related to the register.

Action: Officers to provide data in relation to the Dynamic Support Register.

·       In relation to respite care, officers confirmed that there were 22 children using the service, with seven on a waiting list. The numbers who benefited in any given year varied due to the churn amongst service users.

·       Members noted that social workers had no authority to intervene where a child had been excluded from school, but where home-schooling was considered inappropriate. Officers explained that parents had a right to elective home education and local authorities had few rights to intervene beyond safeguarding and asking the parent to provide a curriculum. If the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act was passed, this would mandate a register of home-educated children, and local authorities would be able to support and challenge parents to ensure that the education provided was appropriate. It was noted that a significant number of children subsequently returned to school because their parents struggled with home-education.

·       Officers were asked about what was being done to reduce the number of permanent exclusions. It was confirmed that there had been 48 exclusions already this year compared with a historic average of 8 to 12. Work was being undertaken to prevent exclusions, but more needed to be done. The i-College provided excellent alternative provision, but more short-term turnaround provision was needed.

Action: Officers to bring a report on exclusions to a future meeting of the CYP Scrutiny Committee.

·       Officers were praised for how well they worked with primary schools around emotionally based school avoidance (EBSA), but it was recognised that this was more a problem for secondary schools. Officers were asked about the scale of the problem, what was being done to encourage schools to buy into the EBSA service, and whether there were additional challenges in relation to academies. It was confirmed that the service was offered to all, but schools could choose to manage the issue in different ways, and some had good internal processes. It was recognised that there needed to be closer working with schools to ensure the quality of support provided. Officers highlighted challenges with quantifying EBSA, since there was an element of self-diagnosis. The team worked with schools to support young people at risk of EBSA as well as those who were missing school.

Action: Officers to bring a report on attendance to a future meeting of CYP Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED to note the report