Agenda item

Education Psychology Services

Minutes:

This service had recently been transferred to SBC from Cambridge Education; the transition has been helped by the fact that the work and responsibilities have remained the same. The team consisted of 15 workers, who were assigned to service users between infants and 25 year olds. Around 20% of the workload was connected to the service’s statutory role and SEND, but the majority of the work was undertaken in schools. This was done on the basis of local schools purchasing staff time as suitable, and was being used by most local schools (with many of these only held back from extending their use of the service by funding issues). Depending on the school’s requirements, the time purchased could vary from 4 days per year to 2 days per week.

 

The service offered targeted interventions for all levels of need, and was based on assessment of the individual’s needs. The team also worked with vulnerable groups (e.g. Looked After Children, those involved with the Youth Offending Team) and also received those who were referred to them due to concerns over a lack of academic progress. In these cases, the team was often having a positive impact (as recorded in the appendix included in agenda papers).

 

The greatest risk to the continued delivery of the service was recruitment. At present, the work of 2 full time equivalents was being delivered by locums. This use of agency workers raised issues of stability, cost and staff retention.

 

The Panel raised the following points in discussion:

 

·  The cases referred to in Appendix A (as presented in the agenda papers) were those attending Slough schools. The total numbers were not available at the meeting, although would be circulated to members afterwards. It was hard to make an informed estimate, as some schools would involve 50 or more students, whilst others would be far more limited in number.

·  Special Educational Needs Co-Ordinators (SENCOs) were encouraged to raise any concerns they had early in the process in order to initiate diagnostics. The subsequent approach was variable, depending on the case involved. It could involve working with teachers to devise appropriate in-class strategies, or may involve more formalised assessment through standardised testing. Supporting the child’s social communication skills may also form a central element. However, the support for SENCOs to act as the first point of support was a consistent element.

·  In order to avoid repeated changes of key worker for children, long term relationships were managed by permanent staff. Locums were employed on statutory duties, and also tended to be longer term than was often the case in other authorities.

·  Whilst the service was well run (and attracted enquiries from other authorities for relevant advice), the decision to end the Soulbury Pay Scale for staff in the Psychology Service was an issue. The Director of Children’s Services would be raising the matter; however, SBC was not alone in this arrangement. However, members expressed an interest in the matter, particularly:

·  Why the decision was taken to end the use of Soulbury?

·  What was the impact of the decision (financial and staffing)?

·  What would be the impact of a decision to reverse this?

·  How did SBC’s policy compare with that in neighbouring authorities?

·  Given these questions, members also requested that a representative from Human Resources attend to answer questions.

·  Feedback from schools was taken at the end of every term. This was then used to compile annual statistics, which were produced at the end of each academic year. As well as the hard data regarding outcomes, it also evaluated ‘softer skills’ of the service (e.g. punctuality, ease of staff to work alongside).

·  It was currently difficult to make year on year comparisons, as this was only the 2nd year of the current Service Level Agreement. Given the greater number of schools using the service and the restructuring of the team since the previous Agreement, it was not comparable with its predecessor.

 

Resolved:  That an agenda item on the Soulbury Pay Scale be added to the agenda for 18th July 2017.

Supporting documents: