1. Accountability AWG 19 th October 2015

2. A GENDA 10:30 – 10:35Welcome and Introductions 10:35 – 10:55 Update from DfE including Q&A 10:55 – 11:35 Presentation: Ofsted and CQC – The Inspection of local area responsibilities for disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs. Followed by Q&A. 11.35 – 12:05Presentation: Calderdale – Sharing their approach to accountability and quality assurance. 12:05 – 12:25Roundtable discussion and plenary based on the morning sessions. 12:25 – 13:25 Networking Lunch including information on POET, User Journey Mapping and other examples of useful tools. 13:25 – 13:55 Presentation: Sheffield – learning from peer review. 13:55 – 14:30Presentation: York – an approach to evidencing impact including User Journey Mapping. 14:30 – 15:25 Breakout discussion and plenary: evidencing impact Discussion focusing on: -How local areas are evidencing impact at a local level -Considering other types of evidence that can be drawn upon to support local accountability -Using the Local Offer to evidence impact -Various approaches to local accountability and quality assurance. 15.25 – 15:30Next steps 15.30Close

3. Welcome and Introductions

4. Update from DfE including Q&A

5. Presentation: Ofsted and CQC The Inspection of local area responsibilities for disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs. Followed by Q&A.

6. The inspection of local area responsibilities for disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs Mary Rayner HMI National lead for disability and special educational needs, Ofsted Lea Pickerill Children Services Inspectors, CQC Accelerated Working Group October 2015

7. The session will update on the following topics and provide opportunity for discussion on:  Regional workshops  Spring seminars  Autumn pilots  Consultation  Next steps Important issues and emeri

8. Consultation proposals  Inspectors will evaluate how effectively the local area identifies disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs.  Inspectors will evaluate how effectively the local area meets the needs and improves the outcomes of disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs.  A wide range of information will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of local area arrangements to identify disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs; and to meet their needs and improve their outcomes.  A wide range of ways will be used during the inspection to obtain the views of disabled children and young people and those who have special educational needs, and their parents and carers. Please encourage involvement in the consultation

9. Julie Killey – Acting Service Manager Strategic Commissioning Calderdale’s approach to accountability and quality assurance 9

10. Overview What Calderdale are doing differently as a result of the pilot inspection What we have learned Our main challenges What we are doing now to evidence impact and drive forward improvement, and future plans Hints and Tips for LAs 10

11. What Calderdale are doing differently following the pilot We had already set up a SEND Accountability Group following the publication of the Special Educational Needs and Disability: supporting local and national accountability, at the end of March 2015. We have widened the remit and membership of this group. We already had a Share Point system in place to share information with partners which was used in the inspection – we are ensuring this is maintained as it will contain the bulk of the evidence needed for an inspection. Briefing sessions have been delivered to provide feedback to Secondary Heads, Primary Heads, Governors, SENCOs, Full Service events etc. 11

12. Continued…. Still following our work programme but with additional emphasis on areas discussed with the Ofsted/CQC team, such as ongoing feedback with families (already underway) but to capture more rather than rely on what an inspection may try and set up. Collaborating with wider partners. Thinking about how we can give a harder edge to the message to our settings. Developed stronger links with School improvement teams. Specific focus on a number of development areas. Including SEN reforms in a wide range of contacts. Developed a more robust quality assurance process for EHC plans including peer review. 12

13. What we have learned We found the overall experience to be really positive. The team were great and it was really useful to have a member of the LA attend the daily meetings which provided lots of detailed information. The Pilot helped raise the profile of the SEND Reforms, it held the LA and partners to account. It provided an informed and independent view of the progress we have made along with accurate details of the areas of further development. None of the areas for further development came as a shock which indicates we have a fairly accurate self- evaluation process. We feel the experience will help ensure Calderdale is in a stronger position for May 16. 13

14. Continued… Children and young people with complex needs are well supported. Support for children and young people on SEN Support is inconsistent. As a local authority our main focus since the reforms were introduced had been on children and young people with statements/EHC plans. SENCOs are well supported and aware needs embedding across the whole settings population. Specific issues identified in a few specific areas and teams. Some schools not clear on the criteria for top up funding. 14

15. Continued….. Confirmation that our multi-agency and collaborative approach to our work was well embedded. Clarification shared with wider partners that it is an area approach and all stakeholders are involved. In terms of the inspection– very short notice so we need to be prepared for the call – it gives very little time to inform schools and families and partners. We had done work to outline what the inspection may be like and so when the call was held we could just immediately contact and circulate. Partners were very supportive during the inspection. Obtaining feedback from parents and carers during the five days of the inspection was hard. 15

16. Our main challenges Completing the transfers in the timescales had been difficult – the new timescales are helping. Staff shortages in specific teams. Key colleagues are driving the implementation, wider ownership is required. Available offer Post 19. Raised expectations from parents re 19 to 25 offer. Further embedding in health and social care. Funding arrangements not helpful in terms, doesn’t follow children and young people – less inclusive schools are financially better off! Sources of funding to deal with gaps identified. Wider development of personal budgets. 16

17. Continued…… Consistency across settings particularly around SEN Support. How to effectively challenge schools and academies to provide a flexibility of support that is consistent across all settings. Use of Notional SEN budgets in schools. Embedding culture change. Improve the quality of outcomes particularly around PfA. 17

18. What we are doing now to evidence impact and driving forward improvement, and future plans We have used the pilot as a tool to drive up further progress with partners. Helped to move the SEND Reforms up partners, services and providers priority lists. Continuing to develop a robust data collection set and dashboard. Future plans are to develop a regional set of benchmarking data. Developed an action plan following the inspection identifying lead colleagues to take the work forward. Ensuring we have systems in place to collect the required evidence as part of our day job. 18

19. Continued Regular surveys Young Person group Parent and carers involved at strategic levels Monitoring the involvement of SENDIASS – identifying themes Monitoring intelligence from individual settings Tracking mediation and tribunal cases Local offer feedback Monitoring reasons for plans out of timescales to identify gaps in services and reoccurring themes Future plans included on storyboards 19

20. Hints and Tips for LAs Create a mailing list if you haven’t already so you can circulate information quickly when you get the call, we already had one for our SEND Reforms Bulletin so this was used. Develop a ‘to do’ action plan in case key colleagues are not available when the call comes in, there won’t be time to wait until the next day. Do briefing sessions for wider partners regarding what an inspection will involve – particularly useful for health colleagues and wider partners. Collect rich evidence of children, young people, parent and carers voices and coproduction including hard to reach groups. 20

21. Continued….. Storyboards we used as part of our communications plan really useful for the inspection and partners. Self-assessment regularly undertaken and reviewed. Closely monitoring progress against strategic plans. Senior Management ‘buy in’ across all partners LA, CCG, Public Health and Settings. 21

22. Documents Some key documents for us included: Our accountability framework Strategic SEND Reforms Plan Self-evaluation Risk assessment Data framework Structure charts were provided of CYPS, CCG and Public Health as part of their timetable planning Workforce and Partner Development Plan Communications Plan Storyboards Details of specifications 22

23. Any Questions? 23

24. Roundtable Discussion and Plenary

25. LUNCH Including information on POET, User Journey Mapping and other examples of useful tools.

26. What’s working and what’s not? Children’s POET Accountability AWG 19th October 2015 Claire Lazarus, Associate, In Control

27. Measuring success Special educational needs and disability: supporting local and national accountability March 2015

28. Measuring the success of the SEND system Examples of data and intelligence:- SEN appeals and outcomes EHCPs completed on time LA and parent survey data POET Feedback from Independent Supporters

29. Children and Young Peo ple’s POET – the brief A tool to capture:- The experience of obtaining an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and in some cases a personal budget from the perspective of the child/young person, family and practitioner Outcomes of having an EHCP (and in some cases a personal budget)

30. What POET gives A way of measuring and understanding performance as experienced by local people A focus on process as well as outcomes Datasets big enough to enable us to address questions that could not be investigated using local data only

31. So what is POET?

32. Why POET works Low cost Quick and easy to complete on line or on paper Able to be repeated Asks meaningful questions about what’s working (and what isn’t working) Voluntary Enables local areas to benchmark themselves Provides feedback/support action planning

34. Children and young people’s POET - Testing & timescales Year 1(2013-14) - 6 Local areas Year 2 (2014-15) - 18 local areas Year 3 (2015-16) – 50+ local areas

35. Mid Sept to end Dec 2015 700 responses 350+ parents/carers 330+ practitioners 40 children and young people

36. Summary of findings The EHC process is working well and leading to some good outcomes in some areas of children and young people’s lives At least 2/3rds of parents/carers said EHC Plans or Personal Budgets had resulted in things getting better or a lot better in 5/6 of the areas covered by POET Practitioners were very positive about some aspects of the process

37. How have local areas used POET? Benchmarking and action planning Holding local engagement and planning sessions Incorporating POET within regular processes to check user experience

38. Next steps Testing period Sept – end Dec 2015 – stretch targets - 9,000+ returns Analysis and third national report by end March 2016 Individual benchmarking reports Local benchmarking and action planning meetings Ensuring sustainability beyond March 2016.

39. Ethics Service evaluation rather than research Proposing to formally seek DfE’s Ethics Committee’s approval Validation and reliability testing Evaluation

40. Thank you clairelazarus@btinternet.com 07880 787190 POET Web Page www.in-control.org.uk

41. Alasdaire Duerden SEND: Sheffield Peer Review

42. Peer Reviews Model developed by LGA Adapted by Yorkshire & Humberside All 15 local authorities in the Region involved First for SEND

43. * Purpose of the Peer Review To assess the understanding and preparedness of Sheffield City Council and its partners for the Children and Families Act 2014, more particularly those elements relating to children and young people with special needs and transitions to adult services.

44. How Did It Work…? Three day visit – not an inspection Two senior Council Officers (York & NE Lincs) Senior Commissioning Manager (Rotherham CCG) Y&H LGA Coordinator

45. How Did It Work? (cont) Reviewed policies and data Interviewed 60 people over 20 sessions Verbal feedback to Council at end of visit Written report a month later

46. Findings: Strengths & Development Cross Cutting Issues Practice, Service Delivery & the Voice of the Child Outcomes, Impact & Performance Management Working Together Capacity, Managing Resources & Communications Vision, Strategy & Leadership Miscellaneous, Quick Wins & Next Steps

47. How Did it Help? Independent scrutiny Insightful challenge Impartial & knowledgeable view of progress Increased visibility of the reforms with partners Improved engagement from partners

48. How Did it Help? (cont) We were making better progress than we thought! Highlighted where immediate attention needed Culture change progress Service user and provider perspectives Sharing of good practice

49. Presentation Sharing experiences of developing accountability strategies within the authority Lisa Abel, York

50. Accountability and Journey Mapping in York. Lisa Abel

51. An overview The scores of the doors Accountability Framework Journey Mapping Where to go next/still to do Working with Partners

52. City of York Total population est (ONS): 204,43 January census: Nos on roll for all York schools: 24,485 Children with SEN: 2,912 (11.9%) England ave Jan 14 (17.9%) Statement/EHCP currently: 553(2.1%) No. of EHCP’s: 341

53. Accountability Framework what feedback we already gathered what evidence we could gather what the information would tell us

54. Accountability Framework Workshops with CYP and parents Feedback from Headteacher and SENCO forums Survey Monkey POET Feedback from SENDIASS and Independent Supporters Moderation with regional partners QA of EHCP’s

55. Developing Journey Mapping In consultation with a parent Breaking the process down into steps Thinking of prompts at each stage to ensure we gather the right information Rating each step

56. Proforma

59. Working with CANDI and SENDIASS Triangulation Development of Journey Mapping Template that can be used by educational settings for SEN Support Plans for Development

60. Working with Partners Parents Forums Post Maintained Education Social Care Health

61. Listening to CYP and parents Keeping in touch with CYP and parents through the process has made a difference

62. Remembering why we are doing this

63. Breakout Discussion and Plenary: Evidencing Impact Discussion focusing on: -How local areas are evidencing impact at a local level -Considering other types of evidence that can be drawn upon to support local accountability -Using the Local Offer to evidence impact -Various approaches to local accountability and quality assurance.

64. Next Steps