The Joint Children & Young People and Adult Social Care & Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee met on Tuesday 22 September 2026 to discuss a significant update on Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision in Warwickshire. Key topics included the Local SEND Reform Plan, the SEND Post Inspection Action Plan, the timeliness of Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans, and the financial position of the High Needs Block.

SEND Update

The committee received a comprehensive update on the SEND provision in Warwickshire, covering the Local SEND Reform Plan, the SEND Post Inspection Action Plan, EHC plan timeliness, and the High Needs Block.

Local SEND Reform Plan

Ross Caws, Head of SEND and Inclusion at Warwickshire County Council, presented the Local SEND Reform Plan, developed in response to the Department for Education's (DfE) Schools White Paper. The plan, submitted in July 2026, focuses on early intervention and inclusion within mainstream schools. Key elements include the Experts at Hand offer, which aims to provide educational psychologists, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, and specialist teachers to schools for children without EHC plans. The plan also emphasizes the expansion of specialist bases within mainstream schools, replacing current resource provisions.

Councillor Nicki Scott raised concerns about the recruitment and training of these professionals, questioning how speech therapists could be trained in six months and suggesting the upskilling of teaching assistants. Ross Caws acknowledged the workforce challenge, stating the DfE's commitment to expanding university courses and the council's plan to create assistant roles supervised by qualified professionals. Councillor Scott also noted discrepancies in the reported figures for full-time equivalent staff in the plan and questioned the timeline for specialist place availability, asking if a list of schools with planned places existed. Ross Caws explained that different numbers related to frontline delivery versus transformation and support roles and assured that while a pipeline of special school places existed, due diligence was required before finalising.

The plan also addresses specialist sufficiency, with an ambition to have specialist bases in all secondary schools. Councillor Scott highlighted that schools are not mandated to host these bases, and the council needs more levers to encourage their establishment. Ross Caws confirmed that the council is seeking more influence in this area and that the reforms are being rolled out until 2035.

Regarding the outsourcing of 300 EHC plans, Councillor Scott questioned if this was a sustainable solution. The officer explained that outsourcing was necessary due to a gap in assessment capacity and that they anticipated needing to outsource 400 plans. They also detailed the process, involving agency staff to quality assure and process plans, and highlighted plans to use AI technology to assist in drafting plans in the future.

Councillor Max Langer inquired about the Experts at Hand model, specifically how the 75% of resources allocated to settings based on current needs would be determined and how schools would be consulted. Ross Caws stated that this was a work in progress for the current term, with a new Head of Service leading on this engagement. Councillor Langer also questioned the delay in establishing specialist places within mainstream schools, referencing a 2024 program that identified a shortage. Ross Caws acknowledged that demand had risen beyond forecasts and that the council was now projecting an exponential rise in EHC plans up to 13,000 by 2029.

Councillor James Norris highlighted the critical importance of the SEND Reform Plan for unlocking approximately £135 million in government funding to address High Needs Block deficits. He expressed confidence in the plan's approval, noting that the council had worked closely with DfE advisors prior to submission. He also sought clarification on the timeline for covering the deficit beyond March 2026, which is projected to reach £250 million. The officer confirmed that the government had not yet committed to future funding percentages beyond 90% and that the council had been using reserves to cover the remaining deficit.

Councillor Norris also raised concerns about secondary schools not always being willing to host resource provisions, citing an example where an agreement could not be reached with a local school, potentially due to financial reasons. The officer acknowledged that while one school had withdrawn from plans, the majority of schools were keen to participate, seeing the benefits. They also noted that the DfE's Schools White Paper mandates inclusion bases in every school, with specialist bases for children with EHC plans.

Councillor George Cowcher described the SEND recovery plan as the biggest unexploded bomb within the authority and asked about a Plan B if the reform plan was not approved. The officer stated that if unsuccessful, the plan would need to be resubmitted the following year, which would have financial implications. They also confirmed that additional investment had been agreed for the EHC plan process, including outsourcing and additional staff.

SEND Post Inspection Action Plan

Ross Caws also presented the SEND Post Inspection Action Plan, developed in response to the Ofsted/Care Quality Commission (CQC) Local Area Inspection in April 2026. The inspection resulted in a middle outcome, indicating inconsistent experiences and outcomes for children and young people with SEND. The action plan addresses six areas for improvement: strategic governance, children with mental health needs reaching crisis, ADHD diagnosis waiting lists, waiting times in health services, EHC plan quality and timeliness, and rates of suspension, exclusion, and school absence for children with SEND. The plan has been submitted to the DfE and NHS England for approval.

Councillor Jo Barker asked if there were any surprises in the inspection findings. Ross Caws stated that while there were no major surprises, the inspectors had made observations about strategic governance, suggesting improvements in accountability and challenging each other within partnerships. Mary Gay, Deputy Chief Executive for the ICB and SEND and Young People's Lead, added that the inspection had been helpful in quickly identifying issues, particularly concerning the demand for diagnoses and specialist school places.

Councillor Nicki Scott raised concerns about the high rates of suspension, exclusion, and absence for children with SEND, questioning how the authority would train staff to address this, given school pressures and potential reluctance to cooperate. Ross Caws explained that it involved a support and challenge approach, with regular discussions at the Warwickshire Education Partnership Board. He acknowledged that exclusions had various underlying reasons, such as assaults, and that restorative practice techniques were being explored.

Councillor James Norris questioned the financial implications of the action plan, noting that many actions were dependent on budget approval or had not yet been costed. The officer explained that a single, integrated plan was being developed to incorporate all three existing plans (SEND Reform, Post-Inspection Action, and EHC Plan Performance), which would include confirmed costings and funding sources. They also mentioned the potential use of the SEND Members Group for deeper dives into the plan.

EHC Plan Timeliness and Other Performance Measures

The committee discussed the ongoing issues with EHC plan timeliness, with only 22.8% of plans issued within the 20-week statutory timeframe, significantly below the national average of 46%. This has led to a backlog, with 385 plans outstanding. Immediate actions include outsourcing the drafting of 400 plans, recruiting additional EHCP coordinators, and diverting resources to the SENDAR team. The council is also exploring the use of AI to improve efficiency.

Councillor Kate Rolfe expressed concern about the dramatic decline in EHC plan timeliness, from 90% within 20 weeks in 2020 to 9% in 2026. She questioned when red flags were raised and the specific reasons for this rapid deterioration. The officer clarified that the decline had been gradual over six years, with performance consistently below the national average. The primary reasons cited were increased demand and insufficient resources.

Councillor James Norris described the performance situation as an exploded bomb and questioned the timeline for improvement, suggesting that the authority had not been proactive enough. Councillor Briggs, the Portfolio Holder for Education, acknowledged the poor performance and apologized to families affected. He stated that he was learning rapidly and that the administration was now focused on being proactive. He also highlighted the importance of communication and a positive mindset within the team.

Councillor Nicki Scott expressed frustration at the recurring conversations about EHC plan delays and the impact on families. She questioned Councillor Briggs's preparedness, noting his recent establishment of bi-weekly meetings for such a critical issue. Councillor Briggs acknowledged a degree of naivety upon taking on the role but stated he was now committed to being proactive.

Councillor Norris and Scott both raised concerns about the administration's response, with Norris suggesting a failure of political leadership due to insufficient resources. Scott was particularly critical of Councillor Briggs not having already implemented bi-weekly meetings.

A resident's question was raised regarding a two-year-old child with a complex medical condition facing a 28-week average delay for an EHCP, potentially impacting critical formative years. The officer assured that early years support was a priority and that they would investigate the specific case.

The committee also discussed the percentage of cases completed over the 20-week limit, with a backlog of 385 plans and approximately 505 plans at various stages of processing. The maximum time a plan had taken to come to fruition was noted as being around 50 weeks.

Councillor Max Langer highlighted that Warwickshire's request rate for EHCPs was higher than the national average, yet the refusal rate was lower. This suggested that the council was assessing more requests but struggling with timeliness. The officer suggested that this could be due to parents feeling schools were not providing adequate support, leading them to seek EHCPs. A cultural shift towards earlier support in schools was deemed necessary.

Councillor Phil Johnson suggested the formation of a task and finish group to provide focused attention on this issue, which was agreed to be discussed at the next meeting.

High Needs Block

The committee was informed that in 2025/26, the High Needs Block allocation was approximately £84 million, but the spend was £158 million, resulting in a £74 million overspend. This is a national issue exacerbated by increased demand for EHC plans, specialist provision, and rising unit costs. If the Local SEND Reform Plan is approved by the DfE, 90% of the cumulative deficit up to March 31, 2025, will be covered by the High Needs Stability Grant, amounting to £135.28 million.

Councillor James Norris questioned the remaining 10% of the deficit and how the ongoing deficit of approximately £125 million would be addressed. The officer confirmed that the council had been using reserves to cover this and that future funding percentages from the government were still to be confirmed.

The council is mitigating increased spend through the SEND Reform Plan, expanding resourced provisions and specialist bases, and increasing state special school provision. Further measures include revising the top-up funding matrix, re-procurement in the independent sector, and recoupment from schools with low attendance and minimal evidence of support. An external audit of High Needs Block spend is underway.

Any Other Business

Councillor Judy Falp raised concerns about the need to engage with the government on issues related to SEND, referencing a letter sent to the government. She expressed hope that the ICB and health services would be genuine partners, as the council could not address these issues alone. No further comments were made, and the letter was to be sent.

The date of the next joint meeting was confirmed as 19 November.