Agenda item

10.1     Emily Taylor led on this paper. The purpose of this paper was to give an update on the school places commissioning process.

10.2     Emily outlined the graduated changes taking place around the process of commissioning specialist provision places in special schools and special facilities to maximise occupancy and efficiency of the use of High Needs Block (HNB) funding. The papers discussed were with reference to the last 3 years. Despite demand there were still places sitting empty 3 years ago at a cost to the HNB of £300K and there has been a discussion around the projected places. Emily discussed the forecasting model that looks at this demand and projected numbers in school. Emily then went on to explain how this process has been further developed to establish a set of commissioning principles. The new principles were discussed, which set out that funding would be recouped if places were under capacity by 5% or more for a period of 3 months. It was agreed with special heads that there would be flexibility in how this repayment was made, in order to protect the integrity of the single value top up system^[1], that reflected that schools with similar cohorts should be funded equitably in a system based on the cost of provision.

10.3     Last year in the autumn term there was a discussion with heads around how to best use the places available and where there might be empty spaces looking at how to best fill these places.

10.4     Emily discussed looking forward to the year 2020 and the places in new free schools that are opening, that will need to be filled by children with the highest level need. Emily discussed the HNB review, looking across a range of provision through mainstream and special schools which recognises that there is a discrepancy in this continuum between need and provision. Para 2.6 sets out the development of a matrix for special schools to work alongside the existing matrix for mainstream schools to ensure that our highest cost placements are used by those children with the highest needs. Again there have been discussions with head teachers, looking at the continued need for children within the provision. It was commented that the Special Head teachers met with Nathan, Fiona and Emily and it was noted that this was a very useful conversation.

10.5     It was confirmed that the model outlined in the paper is the new way of moving forward and setting out the type of need for each young person. There was a comment with regard to the ISEND figures which indicated an increase in special education places. Nathan advised that forecasting shows significant growth and an external company ISOS had evaluated East Sussex’s position regarding EHC plans and provision. There are now more children with EHCPs in special schools than in mainstream schools. Where a child is placed within a special school it costs the HNB more, removes a child from their community and does not necessarily provide better outcomes.

10.6     There were a number of comments regarding young people not attending (ie absent from) a special school. Nathan advised that this is not a huge number but there is a need to ensure we are maximising the use of this provision, bearing in mind the cost of a special school place. A further question was asked, if there have been any thoughts for places taken up by children with long term absence: would special schools be able to fill their place with another child. Nathan advised that it is the aim for such places to then be accessed by a child waiting for a special school place.

10.7     There was discussion regarding the link between the number of children with EHCPs placed in special schools compared to mainstream schools. There are 200 less children with EHCPs in ES mainstream schools than was the case three years ago. School representatives stated that mainstream schools are finding it more difficult to get children an EHCP and are catering as best they can. It was asked if there is a difference, now, in terms of how many EHCPs are being granted at panel compared to the old Statements of SEN. Emily responded that this is partly due to the historically high number of EHCPs in East Sussex and that the mainstream Matrix and rigorous panel process had stopped the increase in numbers. An EHCP could potentially be to the detriment of the child, rather than an opportunity. It was asked how reduced timetables work, as one school noted that a graduated increase of a timetable was written into an EHCP over a course of a calendar year. Nathan asked for details of the specific case mentioned so that the LA can look into this. He stated that we are seeing an increasing number of parents asking for a reduced timetable or elect for their child to be home educated whilst maintaining an EHCP.