Minutes:
A report had been circulated regarding High Needs places for 2018/19, along with a proposal regarding a review of banding for the financial year 2019/20. Vikram Hansrani explained that since bandings had been introduced in 2013 there had been two commissioned reviews of SEND, both of which had recommended a review of banding. It was confirmed that Schools Forum supported the review of banding.
Schools Forum supported the proposal of a review and a request was made for a group of members to conduct that review, comprising a range of schools e.g. mainstream, mainstream with Resource Bases, special schools and possibly business support. SENCos would also be encouraged to join. Those members at the meeting expressing an interest in forming the group were noted.
It was added that there was also a need for a resource place review for 2019/20 and a need to look at post-16 provision. It was suggested that a further conversation about PRUs and financial viability could be incorporated in discussions and the SEND strategy would also need to be taken into consideration. It was confirmed the Task Group would also be reporting into the SEND Partnership.
It was pointed out there might be a loss of ‘good will’ in the period up until 2019/20, with a number of children currently being given lower bandings.
It was proposed that nurseries be included in the review.
Members noted the information about commissioned places. Members were informed that the commissioned places for the previous year had not been accurate and it was believed there was no information available for the prior year. The attached appendix ‘Places SEN/AP 2018/19’ gave a summary of changes and it was confirmed that the list of schools had been provided by the ESFA. It was suggested the list was incomplete which could have financial implications. There was also concern that the DfE had sent a schedule of inaccurate earlier information.
Vikram Hansrani confirmed that the team had contacted all Resource Bases in Slough but they might not appear on the report. The complete list was to be followed up.
It was noted that places had been increased at Marish following observations, and at Haybrook and Littledown further to an earlier report. At £10,000 per head the increase from 92 to 112 places, for example, equated to £100,000.
It was noted that there was a need to review Resource Bases and to ensure they were used to full capacity. It was confirmed that resource provision for those with a Sixth form would also form part of the review and it was agreed there was a need for the College to be involved.
Linda Calverley stressed that only children with a named resource base in their plan should use the facility, those with a band 3 should remain in mainstream, with support.
Linda Calverley explained there would be feedback in March from Education Health Care Plans (EHCP) and National High Needs Funding Formula (NHNFF), pointing out that it was acknowledged nationally there was an identified overspend on High Needs.
Members stated that it was critical that numbers were correct.
At a previous meeting the commitment had been made by Cate Duffy not to transfer money from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block.
It was noted that work was ongoing to ensure Health and Social Care input in discussions.