Home Education - Questions re review response

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please provide me with the following information:

With regard to the Local Authorities response to the 2009 DCSF home
education review response;

1) The LA answer to question 2 states that they believe there are
'reportedly 25% unknown' children who are home educated in
Staffordshire at primary and secondary age. In question 3 the LA
declares that these figures are accurate and not based on
estimates. This figure is at once both precise and vague. 25% of
what? 25% of the known HE children? 25% of all children in
Staffordshire? Considering non-registered children are by
definition unknown to the Local Authority I find the fact the LA
can come to such a precise figure surprising. Please provide me
with details of the information that was used to conclude such a
precise figure. Where is it reported that in Staffordshire there
are precisely 25% unknown children and how many does the LA believe
'25%' comprises of?

2) The LA answer to question 3 refers to 'a rigorous database
within Excel'. Please provide me with a blank copy of this
'database' (I presume they mean spreadsheet). I appreciate all
personal data will need to be removed, I am just interested in the
structure of the database/spreadsheet.

3) Question 6 asks for the proportions of HE children with certain
characteristics. Please explain the answers to this question as I
do not see how the figures add up. Are the figures percentages? In
which case does the LA really believe 95.8% of HE children have
SEN?

4) Question 10 refers to 'EHE groups' the LA claims to offer.
Please provide details of these as I know a number of home
educating families in Staffordshire, none of whom have any
knowledge of LA run HE groups.

5) The document is littered with grammatical and spelling mistakes.
It also contains, on more than one occasion, multiple exclamation
marks. In one instance the author uses 8 exclamation marks at the
end of one sentence (to quote the author, Terry Pratchett,
'Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign of a diseased mind.').
Poorly composed documents clearly reflect very badly not only on
the named author but also on the County Council itself. Please
confirm whether the council has any requirements or set standards
external documents should meet before being sent out.

Yours faithfully,

Matt Hupfield

Dear Stibbs, Lian (L&G),

Thank you for this information.

With regards to point 1:
I assume the absent officers are no longer absent so could you
please ask them for the information I requested regarding their
answer to question 2 of the review questionnaire.

With regards to point 3:
The response to question 6 of the review questionnaire states that
the LA believe 4.2% of EHE children have a statement for their
special educational needs and that 95.8% have non-statemented
special educational needs. Could you please go back to the EHE team
and confirm whether:
a) They believe this to be correct.
b) They have provided misleading information in their response to a
Government review.

With regards to point 4:
I have looked at the link you provided. There is no mention on
those pages of any HE groups that the Local Authority run. Could
you please go back to the EHE team and ask for specific details of
the groups they claim to offer in their response to question 10 of
the review response.

With regards to point 5:
Could you provide me with the name and contact details of the
person who did, or should have, proof read the review questionnaire
response.

Yours sincerely,

Matt Hupfield