Parents were told to apply to school that did not exist

COUNCIL BOSSES MADE ‘UNBELIEVABLE’ ERROR

DERBY City Council bosses suggested a non-existent school for parents with children who have special educational needs and disabilities, it has been revealed.

The revelation, which was described as “unbelievable” by one opposition councillor, came during a city council children and young persons scrutiny meeting on Monday.

Council leaders insist the authority has done nothing wrong from a legal perspective but accepted its actions were “unhelpful” and “will not happen again”.

The meeting heard that the mistake was made during two recent tribunal cases the city council was involved in.

At the time, the city council had worked successfully with management from established school Jasmine House in Ashbourne, who were planning to open a new school in Derby.

But at the time of the tribunal hearings no such school had opened, despite the council stating it as a preferred location to parents involved. The city council said the school was going through the planning process.

This has led to further concerns that the council could have been pre-empting planning permission for such a site.

Andy Smith, strategic director for people services at Derby City Council told the meeting: “Jasmine Hall was proposed as a school, although Jasmine Hall was never actually named in the final health and education plan.

“At the time of the tribunal process Jasmine Hall was not an open school. We had worked successfully with Jasmine House, an established school for children with special education needs and disabilities (SEND) where outcomes are good. The provider was hoping to open a further school which they planned to call Jasmine Hall.

“As part of the education, health and care plan for the children involved, a number of different schools were approached and asked to consider if they could meet the young person’s needs.

“At that point none of the schools approached felt able to meet the young person’s needs. So Jasmine

Hall was stated as the local authority preference during conversations with parents as we progressed with the education, health care plan process.

“Hwowever, this was not the eventual outcome following further discussion and negotiation as part of the tribunal process and a different school was named.”

Mr Smith said that suggesting a school which was not open was “unhelpful”.

He said: “There is nothing unlawful about the actions of the council in this context. But it is unhelpful to name schools that have not been open in health and education plans even if the provider has a track record of providing good provision for SEND.

“We have ensured this practice has been changed to reflect this.”

Liberal Democrat councillor Danielle Lind described the situations as “unbelievable”.

But cabinet member for children, young people and skills, Evonne Williams, added: “As Andy (Mr Smith) has said it is not against the law. However, we don’t find that acceptable and have changed our processes so that will not happen again.”