The Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee met on Friday 16 October 2026 to discuss a range of critical issues affecting children and young people in Surrey. Key topics included the significant challenges in meeting statutory timescales for Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), preparations for Local Government Reorganisation, and the effectiveness of support for children experiencing Emotionally Based School Non-Attendance (EBSNA). The committee also reviewed Ofsted reports for children's homes and considered cabinet responses to previous recommendations.

Emotionally Based School Non-Attendance (EBSNA)

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to scrutinising the council's approach to supporting children experiencing Emotionally Based School Non-Attendance (EBSNA). Leanne from Family Voice Surrey presented findings from a survey of parents, highlighting themes of isolation, a need for early support, and concerns about schools not understanding issues like masking. Parents reported feeling blamed and judged, with a lack of clear communication across services. Children as young as five were noted as experiencing EBSNA, indicating a need for earlier intervention.

Kelly Lancashire, Assistant Director for Inclusion and Participation, provided data showing that children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) are over-represented in the electively home-educated cohort. She confirmed that the council aims to ensure families are making informed decisions about home education and offered support where possible.

The committee heard that while the council has a statutory duty to provide education for children unable to attend school, there are perceived gaps between the council's statutory obligations and the practical support available, particularly concerning timely access to health advice and alternative provision. Primary school leaders expressed concerns that they are increasingly having to manage complex medical barriers without sufficient advice from health professionals, leading to schools carrying significant burdens.

Rachel Wardell, Executive Director for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, acknowledged the complexity of the issue and the strain on the system, particularly concerning health services. She stressed that while the council has statutory duties, it also has convening powers to work with health partners. Liz Townsend, a member of the committee, suggested that the council has a moral duty to bring partners together to improve outcomes for children.

The committee discussed the challenges of medical evidence requirements for absence, with Leanne from Family Voice Surrey highlighting confusion and delays caused by inconsistent approaches. Rachel Wardell acknowledged the need for consistency but emphasised the importance of individualised responses to each child's needs. Kelly Lancashire confirmed that Surrey has a clear framework and policies in place, including a Section 19 policy statement and a medical policy, available on the local offer page. However, there was a consensus that communication of this framework to parents and schools could be improved.

Jonathan Essex, a committee member, proposed that the committee undertake further work on EBSNA and Alternative Provision to gain a clearer understanding of the process and responsibilities, particularly concerning the perceived gap between the council's view and the experience of schools and parents.

Preparations for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR)

The committee received an update on Surrey County Council's preparations for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), which will see the council replaced by two new unitary authorities. Rachel Wardell, Executive Director for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, reported that while the programme had experienced some delays due to senior officers being redeployed to an Ofsted SEND inspection, they were confident of getting back on track. Staff allocation letters indicating whether they would be in the West or East authority had been issued.

Liz Townsend raised concerns about asset management, asking if the work extended beyond mapping existing property assets to assessing the future needs of East and West Surrey for services like special school places, children's homes, and family hubs. Suzanne Smith, Director of Strategy, Commissioning, Transformation and Support, confirmed that sufficiency assessments for SEND, Alternative Provision, corporate parenting, and early years had been updated to consider future demand. She noted that discussions about gaps would form part of future budget and transformation discussions, as the officers' current remit is focused on transition rather than transformation.

The committee also discussed the disaggregation of services. It was explained that the Children's Single Point of Access (C-SPAR) and school place planning would be disaggregated on day one, while home-to-school transport would not, due to its operational nature and alignment with school admissions. The Prison Social Work Team and Surrey Online School were also discussed in terms of their transition arrangements.

Ashley Tilling requested that the strategic partner briefing from July 2026 be shared with all members of Surrey County Council and the Shadow Authorities for transparency. While the slides were offered, it was noted that the information was out of date. The future Surrey website was recommended as the most up-to-date source of information.

Julia Oldroyd provided an update on the establishment of Shadow Schools Forums, which are statutory bodies concerned with school funding. Initial meetings had taken place, with chairs elected and representatives put forward by schools. She clarified that the Schools Forum's remit is specifically about funding and finance, distinct from the Phase Councils, which are broader engagement forums for schools.

Chris Townsend raised concerns about the gap in provision between MindWorks and other stakeholders in supporting children with EBSNA who are no longer attending school. Suzanne Smith explained that transition plans were in place to ensure continuity of services, and that MindWorks, as a county-wide offer, would remain accessible to both East and West Surrey.

Performance Assurance

The committee reviewed the Q1 2026/27 Performance Assurance Report, which highlighted several areas of concern. Notably, the timeliness of Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) has significantly declined, with only 42% issued within the statutory 20-week timeframe, a sharp drop from 95% in the previous year. Rachel Wardell acknowledged the pressures on the SEND system due to increased demand following national reforms, stating that while a recovery programme was in place, additional resources were needed to address the ongoing pressures. Julia Oldroyd added that delays in receiving advice from health and social care also impacted EHCP timeliness.

John O'Reilly expressed frustration at the recurring issues with EHCP timeliness despite previous investments and recruitment efforts. He questioned whether the current recovery programme was new or a continuation of previous efforts and sought assurance that performance would improve before the new authorities took over. Rachel Wardell clarified that the current programme was a continuation, but the scale of demand had outstripped previous planning.

Liz Townsend drew attention to figures showing a decline in EHCP timeliness starting before the national reforms were announced, suggesting other underlying issues. She questioned the effectiveness of the current recovery plan and whether it relied solely on short-term interventions. Rachel Wardell explained that the decline predated the reforms but was exacerbated by them, and that while permanent recruitment was underway, additional resources were needed.

The committee also discussed the attainment gap between disadvantaged children and their peers, with concerns raised about literacy levels in both children and adults. Matt Ansell provided updates on Ofsted reports for children's homes, noting improvements in one home and ongoing work in another. Liz Townsend raised questions about the impact of LGR on maintenance of children's homes.

Children's Homes Ofsted Reports

The committee reviewed Ofsted reports for three Surrey County Council-run children's homes. One home was rated as requires improvement to be good, with concerns raised about inconsistent care, safeguarding practices, and management oversight. However, inspectors noted positive developments in children's engagement in education and family contact. Another home was upgraded to outstanding, with inspectors praising the effective leadership, positive staff relationships, and tailored care provided to children. The third home, inspected for the first time, was rated as requires improvement to be good, with actions required by August 2026. Matt Ansell provided updates on the progress made in addressing the identified areas for improvement.

Cabinet Responses to Recommendations

The committee noted cabinet responses to previous recommendations. Regarding SEND and Alternative Provision, the cabinet acknowledged the need for detailed analysis of mainstream school capacity and disparity between East and West Surrey. They agreed to incorporate feeder school status into the Home to School Travel Assistance policy review and to make the council's GIS mapping system the sole method for measuring walking distances. The cabinet also supported the principle of having two councillors on appeal panels.

In response to recommendations on the Independent Practice Review, the cabinet agreed to provide quarterly progress reports and a final status report in February 2027. They also committed to reviewing safeguarding risks collectively and strengthening the role of schools as strategic safeguarding partners. The multi-agency physical abuse guidance would be shared internally with relevant professionals, with a wider partnership policy being developed.

Regarding School Improvement Services, the cabinet agreed to provide monthly updates to the select committee and implement a robust communications plan with maintained schools. They also agreed to establish a formal forum for maintained schools if services were transferred in-house.

For SEND and Alternative Provision Capital Programmes, the cabinet noted the committee's recommendation to dedicate £8.1 million of alternative funding to West Surrey for ASD provision. They also agreed to include information on latent capacity in mainstream schools by planning area in the Part 2 report and to clarify the type of accommodation and places created in the West Surrey proposals. A list of potential future projects was added to the Cabinet report.

Forward Work Programme

The committee reviewed its forward work programme. Member development sessions on the centre reform plan and children's social care reforms were agreed. The SEND Inspection Report would be circulated to members and made public when issued, with a plan to address findings to be shared in due course.

Other Matters

The committee also discussed the snapshot dashboard for social workers, noting a slight increase in turnover but overall positive trends in permanent staff recruitment. Concerns were raised about the potential impact of the upcoming LGR on recruitment and the need for continued agency cover. The committee also discussed the attainment gap in literacy and numeracy, particularly for disadvantaged children, and the need for continued focus on this issue by the new unitary authorities.

The next meeting of the committee was scheduled for Friday, 4 December 2026.