Agenda item

The Commission considered a report setting out the latest Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) performance update.

Summary of main points raised:

1. In terms of this latest performance update, it was noted that the most significant points were:

a. The number of Education Health and Care needs assessments (EHCNA) finalised had increased in 2022 compared with 2021.

b. Performance continued to be affected by the rise in new EHCNA requests: a 17.6%

increase in requests from 2021 to 2022.

c. At end of year, 38% of EHC needs assessments met the 20 week statutory timescale, an increase on 34% compared with 2021.

d. The average wait time for an EHC needs assessment (open more than 20 weeks) at year end was 33 weeks.

e. As at the end of December 2022 there were 493 active EHC needs assessments in the

system, compared to 484 at the last time of reporting. 273 of these were within 20 weeks timescales; 220 exceeded the 20 week timescale.

f. 2320 EHC plans out of 3007 (77%) were the subject of an annual review within the previous 12 months.

g. In 2022, there were 120 appeals lodged, compared to 37 in 2021; appeal hearings could be held up to as much as 12 months or more after an appeal is lodged.  Of the 120 lodged, 69 cases had been completed and 49 were ongoing.

2. Noting (as per section 2) that 1,000 EHCNA requests had been received in 2022 (an increase of 17.6%), the Chair commented that 791 EHC plans had been completed.  Whilst this was an improved position, there was still a significant gap between EHCNA requests and plan completions.  In discussion, it was noted that:

- it was proposed that scrutiny members would be involved in agreeing Key Performance Indicators for EHC needs assessments for the year ahead.

- the performance situation would continue to be monitored closely, taking account also of the context of the resources available for this area of work.

- work was continuing (including improved communication with families throughout the process) to improve the quality of assessment.

3. The Chair noted that para 2.4 (legacy cases) indicated that there were no current requests in the system which exceeded the 52 week timescale. He had though recently received emails from two individuals which appeared to suggest that the timescale had been exceeded.  It was noted that Cllr Kent would forward details of these cases to officers for investigation. (Note: whilst it is not appropriate for individual cases to be referred to in detail via these minutes, this matter was investigated following the meeting, with responses sent to the Chair and to the individuals concerned).

4. Councillor Bailes commented that whilst the report data indicated that performance was moving in the right direction, there was, in her view, still an issue around communication and improving relationships between officers, caseworkers and families; parents and carers, for example were less likely to be willing to engage in circumstances where they were waiting lengthy periods for tribunals following the lodging of appeals; the improvements being made did not feel visible to some parents, who felt they were being judged through the way the system operated.  In response, the Executive Director: Children and Education commented that improving the relationship between the council and parents was at the forefront of the department’s thinking. The challenges around this situation were recognised but the department was committed to ensuring there was improved and transparent communication with parents and carers and would welcome any contributions/ suggestions from members that would assist this.

5. Cllr Townsend suggested that it would be important to keep the position regarding tribunals under close review, noting the significant rise in appeals lodged (120 in 2022 compared to 37 in 2021).  It was noted that the report included a breakdown analysis of the different categories of appeal.  In discussion, officers stressed that the Council was committed to always exploring mediation to seek to resolve individual cases; to this end, extensive efforts were made to communicate with families as soon as appeals were lodged, to try to address issues and so avoid the need for a tribunal and the delay involved through that process.

6. The Chair suggested that in future updates, it would be useful to include a ‘snapshot’ of the number of ECH plans that did not include a named school within the plan (i.e. at section ‘I’ of the plan – placement).  It was noted that a special placement panel met each week to review these named school allocations.

7. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Chair thanked officers for the transparency of the data and information included in the report and welcomed the openness of the discussion between members and officers at this meeting.

The Commission RESOLVED:

- To note the report and the above information.