Brighton & Hove City Council - Issue - items at meetings - Special Educational Needs and Learning Disability (SEND-LD) Strategy

Report of the Statutory Director for Children’s Services (copy to follow).

RESOLVED:

In relation to Educational Provision

The Children Young People & Skills Committee (Councillors and voting Co-optees voted) agreed:

That on the basis:

(i) That there will be no overall reduction in the number of school places available to pupils in the city requiring specialist provision, and

(ii) the Board noting that before any final decisions can be taken regarding the proposed reorganisation of specialist provision it will be necessary to follow the statutory processes set out in the school organisation legislation, in particular the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and associated Regulations, these processes requiring periods of formal consultation with all interested parties, (which will include parents, governors and staff at the respective schools), and the publication of statutory notices.

It is agreed:

1. That approval be given to draw up detailed proposals in relation to each element of the restructuring of current specialist education provision described below, so as to offer integrated education, extended day activities, respite care and short breaks and integrated health and care teams within each new provision. The proposals being as follows:

(a) That the existing six special schools (Patcham House, Homewood

College, Hillside Special School, Downs Park Special School, Downs

View Special School and the Cedar Centre School) and two Pupil

Referral Units (Brighton & Hove Pupil Referral Unit and the Connected

Hub) be re-organised to form three extended and integrated specialist

provisions with clear vocational pathways and strong support for

preparation for adulthood.

(b) That two specialist provisions be created for children with learning

difficulties as set out below:

(i) That Hillside Special School and Downs Park Special School

amalgamate to form one Integrated Provision West for the full range of cognition and learning needs. The provision will cater for pupils aged 5 - 16 years i.e. Key Stages 1 – 4, and will operate from both of the current school sites but under one leadership team and governing body.

(ii) That Downs View Special School expand to create Integrated Provision East for the full range of cognition and learning needs. The provision will cater for pupils aged 5 - 19 years, i.e.Key Stages 1 – 5, and will be based on the current site ofDowns View School which will be expanded as necessary.

(c) That Cedar Centre School, Patcham House School and Homewood College be re-organised as the city’s school provision for children with

social, emotional and mental health needs to form the Integrated

Specialist Provision Central (SEMH)catering for pupils aged from 5-

16 years ie from Key Stages 1 – 4. The provision will be based on the

current Cedar Centre School site.

(d) That further provision for pupils with complex needs/moderate learning difficulties be made at the Integrated Special Provisions East and West (Cognition and Learning) so that no capacity is lost for these needs following the re-designation of Integrated Specialist Provision Central to cater for SEMH.

(e) That B&H Pupil Referral Unit (currently situated at Lynchet Close and Dyke Road) and The Connected Hub (situated at Tilbury House)

merge to form a single B&H Integrated Provision Central Pupil Referral Unit for pupils with Social, Emotional and Mental Health needs. The Unit will cater for pupils aged 11 – 16 years i.e. Key stages3 and 4 and will be based on the Lynchet Close and Tilbury Housesites.

(f) That children who are currently attending full time at the primary Pupil Referral Unit (based at Lynchet Close) with statements of special

educational needs or EHC Plans naming this provision, move onto the

roll of the Integrated Provision Central (SEMH). Any part-time PRU places will convert to extensive additionally funded support in mainstream school.

2. That for each integrated specialist provision, a lead partner mainstream

secondary and mainstream primary school be identified to champion the needs of young people with SEND/SEMH and facilitate shared and inclusive opportunities across mainstream and specialist provision.

In relation to Other Provision for Young People

The Children Young People & Skills Committee (Councillors only voted) agreed:

3. That the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and Children’s Services shall jointly commission support from health providers to form an integrated team within each integrated special provision as required.

4. That it is noted that the current Jeanne Saunders nursery is sited in

unsuitable premises at Penny Gobby House which does not provide disabled access for children with disabilities, which has necessitated the creation of the satellite site at Easthill Park for six of the children with the greatest mobility needs.

5. That an inclusive integrated nursery with specialist health and care facilities on a mainstream nursery site shall replace the current part-time specialist nursery provision at the Jeanne Saunders/Easthill Park nursery.

Recommendations relating to merged SEND/LD Strategy across the

Children’s Services and Adult Social Care

The Children Young People & Skills Committee (Councillors only voted) agreed:

6. That the Adult and Children’s directorates of the city council shall support the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to commission an all-age ‘Wellbeing’ Service that will respond to the emotional and mental health needs of parents, children and families rather than the individuals within families.

7. That approval be given to identify, consider, and review social work structures and functions supporting children and adults with learning disabilities that are likely to be delivered more efficiently and create a better pathway for service users by one combined Children’s Service and Adult Social Care response rather than via two Directorates.

8.That specifically the following options be reviewed relating to a single

approach to adult and children’s provision:

(i) The adoption of the same Resource Allocation System (RAS) in

Children’s Services as well as in Adult Social Care for an equitable and

fair allocation of resources and direct payments.

(ii) The combining the Autism strategies and plans across Children’s and Adult Services to have one approach for autism across the age range.

(iii) Consolidating as far as possible transport arrangements across the full age range.

(iv) Consolidating the services relating to adults and young people involving deprivation of liberty

(v) A single service for emotional and mental health support.

9. That any service redesign should:

(i) facilitate the transition from Children’s to Adult Services (0 - 25 years) by better preparation for adulthood and pathways to supported internships, apprenticeships and longer term employment.

(ii) encourage inclusive practice through universal and community services such that people with SEND and LD do not have to rely on scarce ‘specialist’ provision and can live and thrive within the wider community.

(iii) aim to prevent the need for high cost placements where children and adults have very complex needs and challenging behaviour by improving local services including mental health and behavioural support services.

10. That options for re-providing services at better value for money and to a good standard in the community and voluntary sector or the private sector be identified and explored.

11. That upon noting the recommendations of the Policy and Resources

Committee of 4 November 2015 in respect of a review of the in house

learning disability accommodation services, there shall be consideration given to whether joint work between the Housing Department and Learning Disability Services in both Children’s and Adults’ Services should take place to review the need for supported living arrangements within the city and develop proposals for supported living arrangements accordingly.

Relating to the Children’s Services Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Strategy

The Health and Wellbeing Board agreed:

12. That the Board notes the recommendations to be considered by the Children, Young People and Skills Committee (the Committee) in relation to specialist educational provision for children.

13. That an inclusive integrated nursery with specialist health and care facilities on a mainstream nursery site shall replace the current part-time specialist nursery provision at the Jeanne Saunders/Easthill Park nursery.

14. That the Board supports the joint commissioning by the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and Children’s Services of support from health providers to form an integrated team within each integrated special provision as required.

Relating to Merged SEND/LD Strategy across the Children’s Services and Adult Social Care Directorates

The Health and Wellbeing Board agreed:

15. That the Board supports the proposal by the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to commission an all-age ‘Wellbeing’ Service that will respond to the emotional and mental health needs of parents, children and families rather than the individuals within families.

16. That approval be given to identify, consider, and review social work structures and functions supporting children and adults with learning disabilities that are likely to be delivered more efficiently and create a better pathway for service users by one combined Children’s Service and Adult Social Care response rather than via two Directorates

17. That specifically the following options be reviewed relating to a single

approach to adult and children’s provision:

(i) The adoption of the Resource Allocation System (RAS) in Children’s

Services that is currently established in Adult Social Care for an equitable and fair allocation of resources and direct payments.

(ii) The combining the Autism strategies and plans across Children’s and Adult Services to have one approach for autism across the age range.

(iii) Consolidating as far as possible transport arrangements across the full age range.

(iv) Consolidating the services relating to adults and young people involving deprivation of liberty.

(v) A single service for emotional and mental health support.

18. That any service redesign should:

(i) facilitate the transition from Children’s to Adult Services (0 - 25 years) by better preparation for adulthood and pathways to supported internships, apprenticeships and longer term employment.

(ii) encourage inclusive practice through universal and community services such that people with SEND and LD do not have to rely on scarce ‘specialist’ provision and can live and thrive within the wider community.

(iii) aim to prevent the need for high cost placements where children and adults have very complex needs and challenging behaviour by improving local services including mental health and behavioural support services.

19. That options for re-providing services at better value for money and to a good standard in the community and voluntary sector or the private sector be identified and explored.

20. That upon noting the recommendations of the Policy and Resources

Committee of 4 November 2015 in respect of a review of the in house

learning disability accommodation services, there shall be joint work between the Housing Department and Learning Disability Services in both Children’s and Adults’ Services to review the need for supported living arrangements within the city and develop proposals for supported living arrangements accordingly.

5.1 The Joint meeting considered a report of the Executive Director, Children’s Services which sought approval for the recommendations arising from the review of special educational needs and disability in the Children’s Services Directorate of the council. The report included recommendations from the concurrent review of behaviour, emotional and social difficulties (BESD). The report was presented by the Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services), and supported by the Head of Behaviour and Attendance, Manager Community Learning Disability Team, Head of Service for Integrated Children’s Development and Disability Service and the Head of Commissioning Mental Health and Children’s Services.

5.2 Councillor Barradell noted that if the proposal to merge the current six Special Schools and two Pupil Referral Units (PRU) into three extended and integrated providers were agreed, there was a suggestion that the three sites would be renamed and asked if that could be part of the consultation with young people being asked for their views. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) agreed it could. Councillor Barradell asked that if there were changes to the service, that measures be put in place to ensure that those changes were effective. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) agreed and said that if the changes went ahead that the service would be monitored.

5.3 Ms Mortensen asked if the proposed changes would reduce the number of nursery school places for those with special needs. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) confirmed there would be no reduction in places. Ms Mortensen asked that provision for those aged 19-25 were not overlooked. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) said that a pathway for that age group was being addressed.

5.4 Councillor Brown said that she supported the proposals. Two of the current sites, Hillside and Downs Park, were in the same road and it made sense to merge them. The proposal to have personalised pathways was good, and would ease the transition into adulthood.

5.5 Councillor Philips felt that the report was too vague and would have liked to have seen more detail. She referred to paragraph 3.2.1 and asked if alternative options for nursery provision had been looked at. With reference to 3.3.5 of the report, she felt that it was paving the way for privatisation of services which the Green Group would not support. Councillor Phillips referred to paragraph 6.9 of the report and asked whether having to seek approval of the Department for Education meant that the authority was cutting the budget quicker than the regulations allowed. Paragraph 5.15 said that there would be resourced provision for mainstream school in the form of 28 ‘virtual places’ attached to mainstream schools, and asked how the schools felt about that. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) said that the report was vague, as approval was needed to take the proposals to the next stage; there was no point investing time if the city did not want to take the matter forward. With regard to nursery provision, alternatives had been looked at including offering nursery provision in mainstream schools. With regard to the private sector the community and voluntary sector would continue to provide the most support. The Executive Director Children’s Services said that if savings were made the money following each child would increase, and so the Secretary of State had to be consulted. However that was a formality and he did not envisage any problems. The Head of Behaviour and Attendance referred to the question about mainstream schools and said that the issue had been discussed with secondary school head teachers and they had been positive about working with the authority; the matter would shortly be discussed with primary school and PRU head teachers. The Executive Director Children’s Services reminded everyone that today the Joint Committee was being asked to agree whether to go to consultation. If it was agreed there would be a full consultation for each area, and the matter would then be referred back to the Children Young People & Skills Committee.

5.6 Councillor Miller asked whether the report had any positive or negative impacts on the provision of respite care and short breaks, as that could have a longer term impact on costings. Paragraph 3.1.1 stated that there would be no overall reduction in the number of school places available to pupils requiring specialist provision, and asked if the places currently available matched those which were needed. Paragraph 3.2.3 referred to the integrated provision of specialist nursery care and asked where that would be. With regard to paragraph 3.3.2, he asked whether the Scrutiny Panel’s recommendations, which looked at gaps in provision for autistic children, were in the report or would be included in a later report. Paragraph 3.3.4 (i) referred to the facilitation of the transition from Children’s to Adult Services, and he asked if that would be linked to the Post 16 Review. With regard to paragraph 3.5.3 and the review of the adoption of the Resource Allocation System, he asked if it was likely there would be losers, and if there were how the authority would ensure there was a smooth transition in any potential change. Paragraph 5.1 said that there would be an estimated 12% increase in the numbers of people with severe or moderate learning disability by 2030, and asked where that figure came from. Paragraph 6.12 said that any disposal of surplus assets identified under the review may potentially generate capital receipts, and asked for assurance that any receipts would be used to support the Council’s future corporate capital strategy. The Head of Service for Integrated Children’s Development and Disability Service said that there would be no reduction in the budget for respite care or short break provision. The Manager Community Learning Disability Team said that the number of school places required for those requiring specialist provision changed annually, and whilst it was hoped that the number places required was accurate at the moment it was liable to change. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services), said that with regard to nursery provision, more work was needed to look at possible adaptation to some premises and so it wasn’t possible at the present time to say where the places would be provided. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services), confirmed that the transition from Children to Adult Services would be linked with the Post 16 review. The figure of an estimated 12% increase had come from the Authority’s own data. The Executive Director Adult Services added that it was very difficult to accurately predict numbers, but 12% was the most likely estimate.

The Chair reminded everyone that this report was about the direction of travel for the delivery of services with a request for an agreement to consult on the proposals; if detailed information were available it would have been included in the report.

5.7 Councillor Taylor said he agreed with the principle of integration of services and hoped that any changes would be delivered seamlessly to the benefit of service uses. He was concerned at the high level of those adults with special needs who were NEET (Not in Employment Education or Training) and was pleased that the Council was addressing that issue. He asked which Committee would have monitoring oversight of the proposals as we move forward. He was advised it would be the Children Young People & Skills Committee.

5.8 Councillor Daniel said that she would support the recommendations and that an opportunity to review the provision was good with the potential to improve the service provided. She said she echoed Councillor Taylor’s concern over those in NEET, and asked officers how they thought the possible changes would affect that high level. The Head of Behaviour and Attendance said that the potential changes would be a good opportunity to review the provision and be more creative, such as ensuring the curriculum was more dynamic and appropriate for the employment market.

5.9 Councillor Mac Cafferty said that the challenge for the future would be to ensure that both adult and children continued to receive the support they needed and that any merger wouldn’t disproportionally affect adults. If the allocation system changed he hoped that no one would be worse off. He said that service provision for those over 25 years of age should also be part of the review, and asked what the current provision was for that age group. The Executive Director for Children’s Services said that there were currently three social care teams; one for children, one for adults and one transitional team. People’s needs differed dependant on their age, and the authority would be looking to provide a smoother process without breaks. The Executive Director Adult Services said that potential changes would not lead to a merger of Resource Allocation, but Children’s Services were looking to adopt a Resource Allocation based on assessed needs. The Head of Behaviour and Attendance added that the proposals being considered created an opportunity to review the service and be creative in the way it was delivered.

5.10 Ms F McCabe said that having a personalised pathway and budget was important and it was crucial to develop a model to support that. Ms McCabe noted that both the voluntary and private sector would be used, and asked that the voluntary sector be supported to develop new services. The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) said that there was already a strong relationship with the community and voluntary sector and that would continue. The Head of Service for Integrated Children’s Development and Disability Service said the service wanted families to have an individual budget and to improve the choices available to them.

5.11 Mr M Jones asked that any consultation include both parents and parent governors, and that issues of travel to the sites be considered as people always preferred to attend their local school. Mr Jones noted that there was little information about Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) and asked that more be provided during the consultation and that it linked up with the Learning Support Service (LSS). The Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) said that the LSS and EIA was already linked and that would continue. With regard to transport, it was an important issue, and it would be necessary to get the right balance between the appropriate school and proximity to the family home.

5.12 Mr B Glazebrook said that the Community & Voluntary sector would support the recommendations in the report.

5.13 Councillor K Norman said that the transition period between child and adult provision had already been looked at for some time, and was pleased that that was continuing. He said that any change would take time to consult and implement, and he expected that any changes would be carefully monitored. Improving services, whilst also achieving better value for money was to be welcomed, and he was therefore happy to support the recommendations in the report.

5.14 Mr R Brett asked for assurance that young people who use the service would be involved in the consultation. TheAssistant Director (Children and Adult Services) said that they certainly would.

5.15 Councillor Bewick thanked all members of the Joint Committee for their involvement in the meeting, and the Assistant Director (Children and Adult Services) and her team for their work on the proposals. These were a set of proposals about modernising and transforming the way in which we supported some of the most vulnerable people in our society. It was a move to consult on the personalisation and the integration of our services so that families felt they are empowered and got the right support in a timely manner. There would be savings associated with this as part of the consolidation of services. The Authority currently spent £42m on disability and special educational needs provision in the city and the proposal could save £1.5m, but that had nothing to do with the austerity cuts being faced elsewhere in local government; this was about being able to reinvest in the world class specialist educational provision and facilities.

5.16 RESOLVED: That the Joint Children Young People & Skills Committee and the Health & Wellbeing Board agreed: