SEND Parent Carer meetings

You said “ Can you share with us more data and information about the numbers of EHCPs in our local area?”

We invited Guest Speaker Nicola Lambert (NE Lincs Lead EHCP Co-ordinator) to attend the biweekly SEND Parent Carer meeting with representatives from SENDIASS and NE Lincs Parent Carer Forum.

Nicola presented statistical information in respect of EHCP’s. She stated that in May 2024 the SENART team had 1966 active cases. Of these 183 were in the assessment process. Nicola said that since 1st January 2024 the LA have finalised 88 EHC Plans. 44% of these have been finalised within the 20week statutory timescale. This has increased from 27% of the 48 plans issued by this time last year. 1783 EHCP’s are currently being maintained.

Nicola shared the following data:

Since September 2023 300 requests for assessment had been received.

• School/setting request = 195
• Parent/carer/young person request = 91
• Other professional request = 14

During the same period last academic year (September 2022-April 2023) we received 255 requests for assessment. This is a 15% increase.

Nicola responded to a number of questions from SENDIASS and PCF:

Q: How had review numbers effectively halved?

Staff capacity had increased to enable more processing and the Education Hub had been a useful tool.

Q: The 20 week turnaround figure had improved. How was this achieved?

The Educational Psychology service had focussed on statutory assessments.

Q: Had there been an increase in the age of children needing assessment following the Covid pandemic?

Although the impact of Covid was now lessening, there had been an increase in assessments for early years children.

Q: Was there any pattern in years 5 and 6 requests for assessment?

 There had been an increase in Year 6 requests as preparation for Secondary School approached.

Q: Was the EHCP format changing from Idox EHC Hub provider?

There were some proposals for future changes, but this would not happen for approximately two years.

Q: How are ECHP’s monitored in terms of successfulness?

This was done through annual reviews. EHCP Co-ordinators did not have the capacity to attend every review due to the number of cases they had. For example, a full-time co-ordinator would have in excess of 300 cases.

Q What do parents do if they are told by schools that funding is not available to meet their child’s needs. Who should parents contact?

The LA do not routinely discuss funding with parents as it is not fair for families to feel they are responsible for any aspect of seeking SEND funding for their child. This is the responsibility of the LA and Educational settings. However, any concerns can be raised by emailing SEN@nelincs.gov.uk. The LA SEND team will follow up any parental concerns with educational settings.

Guest Speaker – Vicky McGuire, Cambridge Park – update on Springboard Outreach

Vicky explained that the Springboard Outreach project started as a one year pilot focused on supporting children under the age of 7 with complex needs and due to the success had been commissioned for a second year. Two Practitioners support a caseload of 5 children each term. Regular visits to schools are made with generally two sessions per week. A session lasts for two and a half hours. So far this year, 28 schools have been involved.

Vicky referred to a course which had been delivered on “Making Sense of Autism”, which had been well received by schools, with over 250 staff members receiving the training. One staff member had fed back that the training had completely changed her working life for the better and now understood how to better support a particular child. Parents had also fed back how much improvement had been made in support and how things in homes had improved as a result of the project.

NELPCF commented that the work of the project had been extremely positive and that she had received very positive feedback from parents. NELPCF considered the project to have been amazing so far but had some concern about what happened when a child involved reached an age where the support was no longer available under the age limit of the project. Vicky reported that as many resources and reasonable adjustments as possible were kept in place after the age of 7. CL stated that when the project moves away from a particular child due to the age restriction, the LA (CL) would review the needs of that child. Vicky stated that she would love to engage more Practitioners on the project but that would have a detrimental effect on Cambridge Park staffing requirements. Clare reported that negotiations were ongoing between the LA and Cambridge Park regarding extending the age limit to support higher aged groups of children although specifics had not yet been agreed but Clare and Vicky meet regularly.

Vicky explained that there would be an enormous training package across the borough targeting school leaders and SENDCo’s. Training sessions would last 2.5 hours and would cost just £10 per delegate. CL briefly reported on some “Myth Busting” including, but not exclusively:

• To receive support through Springboard, a child would need to be attending Cambridge Park. This was incorrect.
• Springboard was there to keep children out of specialist settings. This was incorrect. Springboard was there to support professional in supporting children with complex needs.
• A child needs to have an EHCP to receive support from Springboard. Vicky confirmed that an EHCP was not required to receive Springboard support.
• A diagnosis of autism was a requirement to receive support from Springboard. This is not the case.
• Vicky reported that she had received positive feedback in respect of social exposure and that it was important to see children happy in their settings. NELPCF queried whether parents were educated enough about the balance between a child seeming happy in a setting and whether they were receiving and succeeding in actual education. Vicky stated that there was a balance to be achieved but given the mental abilities of some children needing support, education may not always be as advanced as other children in mainstream education. Clare stated that part of monitoring included significant involvement with parents and in many cases the offer of resources which could be used at home. NELPCF stated that it was important that parents be made aware of projects such as Springboard and other SEN support available. At this point Vicky left the meeting due to another commitment. NELPCF asked if Springboard would be appropriate to support three families she had been made aware of with children with brain tumours. Clare stated that the Neurodiversity Pathway was appropriate. Jo stated that the first point of call would be through school nurses.