Officers will be in
attendance to provide the scrutiny panel with a general overview/introduction
of the topic, including:
·
an overview of the legal framework in which statutory
agencies must work to support children and young people with SEND;
·
an outline of how SEND can affect a child or young
person’s ability to learn; and
·
an
update on the local developments within Middlesbrough.
Minutes:
The Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and
Specialist Support Service; the Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review and
the Principal Educational Psychologist were in attendance to provide the
scrutiny panel with a general introduction/overview of the topic of Special
Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), including:
·
an overview of the legal framework in which statutory agencies needed to
work to support children and young people with SEND;
·
an outline of how special educational needs and disabilities (SEND)
could affect a child or young person’s ability to learn; and
·
an update on the local developments within Middlesbrough.
The Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and
Specialist Support Service advised that the submitted report contained a detailed
overview of the SEND Code of Practice and the broad duties of the Local
Authority, Health, schools and colleges. The report also contained information
on the key developments in Middlesbrough, which
aimed to ensure that the needs of children and young people with SEND 0-25 were
being met.
It was advised that the evidence presented would
focus on the four main areas of need that were listed within the SEND Code of
Practice, aiming to provide the scrutiny panel with a shared understanding of
the impact of SEND on a child or young person’s ability to learn.
Members heard
that The Children and Families Act and the Special Educational Needs and
Disabilities Code of Practice (2014 updated 2015) transformed the system for
disabled children and young people and those with Special Educational Needs
(SEN), ensuring that services consistently supported them to achieve positive
outcomes.
The reforms
created a system from birth to 25 through the development of coordinated
assessment of a single Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP), which aimed
to improve cooperation between all
services responsible for providing education,
health and or social care and giving parents and young people greater choice and control over their support.
It was advised
that a SEND review was currently underway, which planned to investigate the
impact of the SEND Code of Practice. It was hoped that outcomes of the review
would be reported at the end of the year.
It was
commented that the Local Area SEND Inspection Framework was currently being
updated/revised and it was anticipated that the new framework would include
children and young people accessing Alternative Provision. Further updates on,
and revisions of, the framework would be shared later in the year.
In terms of
data, Members were advised that in 2021, 3.7% of pupils attending school and/or
settings in Middlesbrough had an EHCP, that equated to 1300 children and young
people, which was slightly lower than the North East rate of 3.8% but in line
with the National of 3.7%.
It was
important to note that there had been a significant increase in requests for
EHCP assessment nationally. It was believed that the increase was due to the
impact of COVID-19. That surge had resulted in an increased workload for the
SEND Assessment Team and the Educational Psychology Service.
It was noted
that nationally, there was a shortage of educational psychologists. However,
Middlesbrough had a strong team of educational psychologists who were
recognised regionally and nationally for the work they undertook.
Members were
advised that in 2021 a total of 3,459 pupils in Middlesbrough schools were in
receipt of SEN Support, which accounted for 13.8% of the overall school
population and was higher than both the North East (12.9%) and National
(12.2%).
It was planned
that the new Inclusion, Assessment and Review Service would be further
developed to improve and enhance SEN Support. The Local Authority’s workforce
development package also aimed to ensure that all settings had access to
appropriate training and support.
In respect of
the SEND Code of Practice, there were four main areas of need within the code:
·
Cognition and Learning
·
Communication and Interaction
·
Physical, Medical and Sensory
·
Social, Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH)
In respect of
each of the four main areas, the impact of those needs on the child/young
person would be identified and a case study example would be provided to
identify how Education, Health and Social Care worked together to support and
meet the needs of children and young people with SEND.
The Principal
Educational Psychologist advised that in terms of cognition and learning,
essentially thinking and reasoning, there was a huge spectrum of needs. The
following key points were made:
·
A small number of children may have profound
and multiple learning difficulties, affecting all aspects of their development
and functioning.
·
Some would have severe learning difficulties,
while others would have mild to moderate learning difficulties.
·
Those attending special schools, with severe
learning difficulties, would be likely to have very significant needs in terms
of thinking and reasoning, have difficulties with mobility and require support
in respect of personal care.
·
Those with moderate to mild needs were more
likely to be educated in mainstream schools with a significant amount of
additional support.
·
Beyond severe, moderate and mild learning
difficulties there was a further group that had specific learning difficulties
with literacy (dyslexia, which was the most common developmental difficulty,
affecting 10% of people and ranging from mild to severe), numeracy
(dyscalculia) or motor planning (dyspraxia).
In terms of
the impact on functioning development and learning, it was advised that the
child or young person may:
·
become acutely aware of his/her areas of difficulty and may then become
fearful of learning tasks and lose confidence in their own abilities;
·
require support to access work and may develop work avoidance
strategies;
·
mask difficulties, sometimes through inappropriate/challenging behaviour and questions; and
·
reach adulthood without having acquired the basic
levels of literacy and numeracy (and in some cases social skills and confidence
and/or personal independence) that they need in order to be able to manage in
adult life.
It was commented that, if dyslexic, a child may
be able to answer questions and express good ideas orally, but be unable to
record the information. Members heard that the child may also dislike reading,
partly because the content of books may not be age appropriate.
The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review
provided a case study example in respect of cognition and learning needs.
Members were advised that a child had started primary school as a reception
admission and it was then identified that the child had cognition and learning
needs. Once those needs had been identified, the school pulled together a team
of professionals to provide support to the child, there
was educational
psychology involvement and speech and language therapy was provided. The school
applied to Local Authority for high needs funding and utilised
that funding to develop a small nurture group provision, which involved a
Teaching Assistant providing memory, literacy, numeracy and handwriting support
alongside intervention programmes for reading and
spelling.
As the child was nearing the transition to
secondary education, the school put forward a referral for a
EHCP assessment. At the time of the referral the child had moderate learning
difficulties and in Y6, at time of referral, was working at Y2 level across the
national curriculum. The assessment focused on planning for the child’s
secondary transition. Following assessment and consultation with the family, it
was determined that the child should transfer to a secondary resource base,
which was additionally staffed and funded to provide a higher level of support
to those with SEND. It was added that the child’s EHCP would be reviewed on an
annual basis to track progress and ensure that the child continued to achieve.
In terms of communication and interaction needs,
the Principal Education Psychologist advised that children and young people had
difficulties with speech production; with expressing their needs, wishes and
opinions and with understanding language that they heard. There was a wide
spectrum of need, some would be preverbal, while others would have needs that
were much less obvious. Some children and young people had social communication
and social interaction needs. Such needs were very typical of those diagnosed
with autistic spectrum conditions.
With communication and interaction needs, it was
commented that a child or young person may:
·
have encountered difficulties with speech sound production that made their
speech difficult to understand, causing them frustration;
·
have given up trying to make themselves understood;
·
struggle to make and maintain friendships, which could have an adverse
impact on their social development and confidence at school; and
·
have speech immaturities that impact upon the
acquisition of literacy skills.
It was
commented that in instances where children had receptive language difficulties but could read
fluently, it could be assumed that they had a higher level of understanding of
text than was actually the case. The scrutiny
panel was advised that the child or young person may not understand longer and more complex
words used in the classroom, causing stress and frustration and resulting in a
struggle with listening and attention. Members heard that may lead others to
perceive that they were misbehaving. It was also added that the child may struggle
to acquire key vocabulary needed for learning (e.g. language relating to range
of simple concepts such as time, size, shape, position).
The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review
provided a case study example in respect of communication and interaction
needs. Members were advised that a child, whose needs were evident very early
on in their life, had received a diagnosis for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
before they had started primary school. The child was open to the Local
Authority’s Specialist Early Years Service, which
involved the early identification of needs by a multi-disciplinary team. The
child was behind with meeting early years milestones
and was referred for an EHCP assessment. The child subsequently secured an
EHCP, prior to starting in Reception.
Due to the
severity and complexity of the child’s needs, it had been determined very early
on that the child would require a place in an Autism special school. In respect
of the Autism special school, there was a higher staff to pupil ratio and
specialist staff. The school also offered a nurturing environment and
specialist programmes for social and communication skills development. At
Annual Review, as the child was approaching Year 5, it had been determined that the child was
making good academic progress (2 years behind chronological peers), which
confirmed that the school was meeting the child’s needs. It was commented that the
child required additional support during social and unstructured times and to
support emotional regulation.
As the child was making good progress, in terms
of secondary planning, a mainstream secondary ASD resource base was being
explored. The resource base planned to allow the child to access the broader
secondary curriculum but also provided a nurturing and supporting environment
to meet the child’s needs.
In terms of physical, medical and sensory needs,
the Principal Educational Psychologist advised that children with medical
conditions, physical disabilities and sensory impairments formed a particularly
diverse group with highly individual needs.
In general terms, it was commented that a condition or disability could
make it difficult or impossible for a child or young person to make use of the
educational facilities normally provided.
Members heard that a child with mobility
difficulties would more than likely require adjustments to the curriculum and
significant adaptations to the physical environment. It was also commented that
mobility difficulties could also result in a child requiring support for
personal care and/or daily routines and learning activities.
It was explained that, in terms of the impact on
the individual, mobility difficulties could lead to issues with self-image and
self-esteem, particularly if the child or young person had a chronic or
degenerative condition, or had suffered a life-changing accident.
Members heard that children with physical,
medical and sensory needs could experience periods of absence from education,
due to being unwell or taking time off school to attend medical appointments
and receive treatment.
The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review
provided a case study example in respect of a child with physical, medical and
sensory needs. It was advised that a child’s sensory impairment had been
identified at 0-6 months, the child had undergone audiology screening and input
from health services to diagnose the condition. The family and child were
supported by professionals, which included the Local Authority Sensory Service.
The child had attended a mainstream school, had
secured an EHCP and had received regular support and input from a teacher of
the deaf. A high needs funding package of support was in place that provided
one-to-one support from a teaching assistant, pastoral support and mentoring.
It was also added that assistive technology had been provided to reduce the
requirement for adult supervision and support. Ultimately, the child had made
very good academic progress and had achieved GCSE’s grade 4-9. The child then
secured an apprenticeship and was supported by the DWP in the workplace, which
subsequently led to the young person achieving sustained independence and
employment.
In terms of Social, Emotional and Mental Health
Needs (SEMH), the Principal Educational Psychologist advised that SEMH was a
major focus for the local area. Members were advised that very often the behaviour could be rooted in early trauma, difficulties in
forming a secure attachment with an adult when young, loss/bereavement of a
loved one or an undiagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder, such as an autistic
spectrum condition. In addition, it was
explained that the child or young person could have unidentified learning needs
or speech and language needs. Members heard that anxiety and depression were
increasingly prevalent in children and young people with SEMH, with COVID-19
undoubtedly having an impact.
In terms of SEMH, Members heard there was an
increased risk of the child or young person being excluded from school and
losing valuable learning time, which would be likely to have an impact on their
progress and possibly their life chances. It was commented that the child or
young person could require targeted teaching in a dedicated space, away from
other pupils, in order to access learning. It was explained that, being taught
away from other pupils, was likely to have an impact on the range of activities
the child or young person could access and would reduce interaction with peers.
It was commented that their social skills and confidence could be adversely
impacted. Members were advised that some children could appear loud, confident
and challenging, however, inside they could be very distressed, anxious and
hurting. Children tended to either act out their frustrations or internalise them. For those who internalised
their feelings, it was commented that those children may engage in
self-harming, become involved in risk taking behaviour
placing them and others in danger or develop anxiety based school avoidance
(EBSA).
Members were advised that SEMH needs were very
complex and very much interwoven with the other needs referenced.
The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review
provided a case study example in respect of a child with SEMH. A child had been
identified as being at risk of exclusion at primary school and was added to SEN
register. The school worked with agencies to support the child and the family to
access education and learning. Subsequently, a holistic package of support was
developed for the child. The child was then referred to the Local Authority’s
Inclusion Support Team, as the school had identified the child was at risk of
exclusion from education due to presenting behaviour.
Members were advised that high needs funding had
been accessed to provide the child with a behaviour
support mentor and a short-term (6 week) assessment placement was also secured
at Holmwood School. The purpose of the placement was
to undertake a multi-agency assessment to identify further additional needs and
develop strategies that school could use to fully support the child. Once the
assessment had been completed, the child successfully returned to school.
Additional funding had also been secured to provide a school-based support
package, which included support from a teaching assistant to guide and mentor
the child.
In respect of the child moving to secondary
education, it was advised that transition planning had been undertaken by
sharing information from the assessment. Transition planning had enabled the
new school to understand the needs of the child, in addition to the triggers
and change that could result in the child’s behaviour
becoming more challenging. Through transition planning, it had been established
that the child’s needs would be best met in a special school. As a result of
that, an EHCP had been secured and the child successfully transitioned to a
special SEMH school for secondary education.
A Member raised a query regarding waiting lists
for EHCP assessments. In response, the Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and
Specialist Support Service advised that there was no waiting list. It was
clarified that the statutory process allocated 20 weeks for completion of the
EHCP assessment and in Middlesbrough, during 2020/21,
99% of assessments had been completed within that timeframe. Middlesbrough was performing well and was currently ranked
9th nationally, which was a significant achievement. A strong team
had been established to ensure that assessments were processed effectively,
efficiently and within the 20 weeks timeframe.
A Member raised a query in respect of the impact
for teaching staff. The Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and Specialist Support
Service advised that all teachers received targeted training to enable them to
teach, support and meet the needs of children and young people with SEND. It
was commented that all schools had a Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENDCo). Members heard that, as a local area, a SEND review
had been undertaken of all Middlesbrough’s settings,
i.e. for early years, primary, secondary and post-16. The purpose of the review
was to identify strengths and areas of development. Outcomes of the review had
been reported to the settings and actions were being undertaken to further
develop/enhance support/training for members of staff. It was also commented
that there was a Workforce Development Programme in
place, which aimed to ensure the training needs of staff in each setting were
being met. In addition, the new
Inclusion, Assessment and Review Model had been implemented, which provided the
greatest support at the earliest of stages.
A Member raised a query regarding the mechanisms
established to engage successfully with parents. The Strategic Lead for the
Inclusion and Specialist Support Service advised that work had been undertaken with
families to seek feedback on the provision and support available in the local
area. Drop-in sessions were held for parents that involved colleagues across
Education, Health and Social Care, enabling them to discuss the needs of their
child with the relevant professionals. The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and
Review commented that part of the process involved securing the most appropriate
educational placement for the child, which could involve difficult
conversations with parents. The importance of building and developing positive
relationships with parents, which were based on mutual challenge and trust was
referenced. It was commented that the Local Authority worked hard to:
·
ensure parents were aware of statutory duties; and
·
resolve any conflicts or disagreements with families.
Members heard that the Local Authority would
continue to work in partnership with families to meet the needs of Middlesbrough’s children and young people. It was also
highlighted that parents were able to refer their child for an EHCP assessment.
A Member
raised a query about identifying those with SEND, who developed needs as they
progressed through school. The Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and Specialist
Support Service advised that the Local Authority had recently developed a new
service and model that focused on early intervention and support at the
earliest of stages. Feedback from schools had been used to inform the model’s
development. It was commented that a review of the model had been undertaken
and work was planned to further develop/enhance the model to provide outreach
and inclusion support to settings. The Principal Education Psychologist advised
that the schools that used Middlesbrough’s
Educational Psychology Service were able to access consultation sessions. Middlesbrough Psychology Service operated a consultation
based service, whereby, when schools had an initial concern about a child, discussions
were held to explore explanatory factors. Following the initial discussion, if
SEND needs were identified, the process would be formalised
and a consultation session would be held with parents, the school and other
relevant agencies to discuss next steps and agree a way forward.
A Member queried the key duties in respect of
children and young people with SEND across the 0-25 age range. The Strategic
Lead for the Inclusion and Specialist Support Service advised that once a young
person was being educated at university level, the EHCP would cease. Support
was provided to ensure that children and young people were able to progress in
their education. It was clarified that not all EHCPs would continue to the age
of 25, plans were reviewed on an annual basis and if a child or young person
was progressing well and achieving their identified outcomes, the plan would
cease. In terms of the post-16 element of the EHCP, the Head of Inclusion,
Assessment and Review commented that young people may secure a place at
university, an apprenticeship or employment. However, for those young people
with more severe/complex needs, work was undertaken with other departments
(e.g. adult social care) and stakeholders (e.g. Jobcentre
Plus) to plan an appropriate pathway and develop a package of support.
A Member
queried how the Local Authority ensured that statutory duties in the SEND Code
of Practice were being met. The Strategic Lead for the Inclusion and Specialist
Support Service commented that the Local Authority worked closely with all
settings to ensure compliance and a SEND review had been undertaken to ensure
settings were accessible and staff were fully trained. Reference was also made
to service level agreements being in place; quality checks being conducted; feedback
being requested from children, young people and parents and training being
delivered. The Head of Inclusion, Assessment and Review advised that schools
were also involved in a number of Local Authority working groups/workstreams aiming to develop provision in respect of areas
of strategic importance. It was commented that there was a strong governance
structure in place to support that work, which involved regular monitoring and
reporting to the Children’s Trust.
A Member expressed concern in respect of the
negative connotations associated with the word ‘disability’. The Strategic Lead
for the Inclusion and Specialist Support Service acknowledged those concerns,
however, it was advised that the Local Authority was governed by a legal
framework and there was a need to be consistent and in line with national
language.
A Member commented that it would be beneficial
to receive data on type of needs and pupil characteristics and how those
compare regionally and nationally.
AGREED
That the information
presented at the meeting be considered in the context of the scrutiny panel's
investigation.
Supporting documents: