CAN-Do resource allocation system for children with SEN

The request was refused by North Yorkshire Council.

Dear North Yorkshire County Council,

Since the CAN-Do Resource Allocation System has been introduced,

1 How many children have been through the statutory assessment process?

2 How many children have been assessed using the CAN-Do RAS?

3 Please confirm whether or not it is a requirement of the Council that a child must have a completed CAN-DO in order to be assessed for an EHCP.

4 Has the CAN-Do RAS been sold/traded to any other organisation(s), if so please name them? How much income has the CAN-Do generated to date?

5 Please publish the CAN-Do questionnaire, the analysis spreadsheet and the allocation table.

6 Please publish any other assessment criteria for the Can-Do.

7 Of the indicative budgets generated by the CAN-Do system, how many times has the final (actual) budget been increased, and how many times has the final (actual) budget been decreased?

8 I would like to draw your attention to a document produced by the In Control organisation, who advised the Council on setting up the CAN-Do. In 'Understanding the Resource Allocation System' (2013) (1) it states,

".. In Control has underpinned its approach to resource allocation with two simple principles:

Transparency - everyone knows what is happening, the basis for decision being made and no decisions are taken 'behind closed doors'.

Participation - all those who need to be involved, including the family, are involved and their views lead the discussion."

and with regard to allocation tables:

"Whatever approach is adopted it is vital that parents and parent representatives understand and participate in the discussion which informs the drawing up of the allocation table. Following through on the two underpinning values to this approach; transparency and participation, the end result has to be presented in a simple format and easy for everyone to understand."

Did the Council follow these two principles when it drew up the CAN-Do RAS? Were parents or parent representatives involved in drawing up the allocation table?

Yours faithfully,

John Furlong

(1) http://www.in-control.org.uk/media/13159...

North Yorkshire Council

Thank you for contacting North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC). We confirm
that we have received your correspondence.
 
If you have submitted a new Freedom of Information (FOI) or Environmental
Information Regulations (EIR) request to NYCC - we will contact you as
soon as possible if we need any more information from you to respond to
your request. If we do not need any more information we will pass your
request onto the appropriate officer to respond. A response will be sent
to you as soon as possible, and within 20 working days as required by the
relevant legislation.
 
If you have requested an internal review of an FOI or EIR response sent to
you by NYCC or otherwise expressed dissatisfaction about an FOI or EIR
response – we will respond to you as soon as possible and within 20
working days, in accordance with best practice guidance.
 
If you have raised a data protection concern about the way in which NYCC
has handled your personal information – we will respond to you as soon as
possible and within 20 working days, in accordance with legal
requirements/best practice guidance.
 
If you have asked to be removed from a mailing list – we will forward your
request onto the relevant department for action.
 
If your correspondence relates to an existing case - we will forward it to
the relevant officer for consideration and action as required.
 
Copied correspondence - we do not respond to correspondence that has been
copied to us.
 
For any other enquiry – NYCC will contact you shortly.
 
If your enquiry is urgent and you request an immediate response please
call the information governance team on 01609 532526.
 
Yours faithfully
 
The information governance team

cypsfoi, North Yorkshire Council

1 Attachment

Dear John Furlong

 

Thank you for your request for information regarding the CAN-DO resource
allocation system for children with SEN.  Please see our response below.

 

1 How many children have been through the statutory assessment process?  
312

 

2 How many children have been assessed using the CAN-Do RAS?

We do not record this information.

 

3 Please confirm whether or not it is a requirement of the Council that a
child must have a completed CAN-DO in order to be assessed for an EHCP.

The CAN-Do is part of the process and informs decision making but is not
compulsory.

 

4 Has the CAN-Do RAS been sold/traded to any other organisation(s), if so
please name them? How much income has the CAN-Do generated to date? 

No, the CAN-Do has not been sold/traded to any other organisation.

 

Q5 Please publish the CAN-Do questionnaire, the analysis spreadsheet and
the allocation table. 

 

Currently the CAN-Do is only published to people who have been trained in
using the tool to ensure quality and fidelity to the assessment process.
The CAN-Do will potentially be a traded tool that other LA’s may wish to
purchase.  Whilst this isn’t a definite we consider this information to be
exempt from disclosure under section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 which allows information likely to prejudice the commercial
interests of any person, to be withheld. In this case we consider the
information requested to be exempt from disclosure. As the exemption is
subject to the public interest test we have considered this accordingly.
We consider that the public interest in maintaining the above exemption
outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Whilst the County Council
appreciates that there is a strong public interest in the release of the
information, it believes that in this case the greater public interest
lies in withholding the information in order to protect the commercial
interests of the County Council. Please see attached a copy of our appeals
procedure.

 

6 Please publish any other assessment criteria for the Can-Do. 

not applicable

 

7 Of the indicative budgets generated by the CAN-Do system, how many times
has the final (actual) budget been increased, and how many times has the
final (actual) budget been decreased?

Decrease: 72 Cases

Increase: 53 Cases

Please note that the increases shown above do not include placements in
Independent, Non Maintained and Independent Specialist Providers, however
additional funding is made in order to fund the costs associated with
these specialist provisions.

 

8 I would like to draw your attention to a document produced by the In
Control organisation, who advised the Council on setting up the CAN-Do. In
'Understanding the Resource Allocation System' (2013) (1) it states,

 

".. In Control has underpinned its approach to resource allocation with
two simple principles:

 

Transparency  - everyone knows what is happening, the basis for decision
being made and no decisions are taken 'behind closed doors'.

 

Participation  -  all those who need to be involved, including the family,
are involved and their views lead the discussion."

 

and with regard to allocation tables:

 

"Whatever approach is adopted it is vital that parents and parent
representatives understand and participate in the discussion which informs
the drawing up of the allocation table. Following through on the two
underpinning values to this approach; transparency and participation, the
end result has to be presented in a simple format and easy for everyone to
understand."

 

Did the Council follow these two principles when it drew up the CAN-Do
RAS? Were parents or parent representatives involved in drawing up the
allocation table Parents weren’t directly involved in the drawing up of
the original pilot version although they were part of the discussions. 
Parents have been involved in the current review of the CAN-Do and
continue to be so.

 

Kind regards

 

show quoted sections

Dear North Yorkshire County Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of North Yorkshire County Council's handling of my FOI request 'CAN-Do resource allocation system for children with SEN'.

The reason for my request is set out briefly below.

In Control has produced guidance called Understanding the Resource Allocation System (RAS). It states:

Families have reported their concern and opposition to historic approaches to resource allocation for many years. They feel strongly that decisions made do not include their views, that decisions are taken 'behind closed doors' and that they do not understand how decisions have been taken. Many criticisms have been levelled at the current systems:

assessments are being completed to justify a level of support or offer of services,

resource panels and similar funding arrangements being inconsistent in their decisions,

decision-making being adversely affected by how much funding is left in a budget towards the end of the financial year.

In light of this In Control has underpinned its approach to resource allocation with two simple principles:

Transparency everyone knows what is happening, the basis for decision being made and no decisions are taken 'behind closed doors'.

Participation all those who need to be involved, including the family, are involved and their views lead the discussion.

The SEND Code of Practice at para 7.32 states:

Local authorities should be transparent about how they will make decisions about high needs funding and education placements. They should share the principles and criteria which underpin those decisions with schools and colleges and with parents and young people.

I believe that by refusing my request the Council is not providing the transparency required by the Code of Practice, nor following the guidance on RAS as set out by the system's originator, In Control. It is extremely difficult for a family to challenge a decision without knowing how that decision was reached. Only by publishing details of the CAN-Do RAS can parents be clear about how the Council is reaching a decision.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

I look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully,

John Furlong

North Yorkshire Council

Thank you for contacting North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC). We confirm
that we have received your correspondence.
 
If you have submitted a new Freedom of Information (FOI) or Environmental
Information Regulations (EIR) request to NYCC - we will contact you as
soon as possible if we need any more information from you to respond to
your request. If we do not need any more information we will pass your
request onto the appropriate officer to respond. A response will be sent
to you as soon as possible, and within 20 working days as required by the
relevant legislation.
 
If you have requested an internal review of an FOI or EIR response sent to
you by NYCC or otherwise expressed dissatisfaction about an FOI or EIR
response – we will respond to you as soon as possible and within 20
working days, in accordance with best practice guidance.
 
If you have raised a data protection concern about the way in which NYCC
has handled your personal information – we will respond to you as soon as
possible and within 20 working days, in accordance with legal
requirements/best practice guidance.
 
If you have asked to be removed from a mailing list – we will forward your
request onto the relevant department for action.
 
If your correspondence relates to an existing case - we will forward it to
the relevant officer for consideration and action as required.
 
Copied correspondence - we do not respond to correspondence that has been
copied to us.
 
For any other enquiry – NYCC will contact you shortly.
 
If your enquiry is urgent and you request an immediate response please
call the information governance team on 01609 532526.
 
Yours faithfully
 
The information governance team

Infogov - Veritau, North Yorkshire Council

Dear Mr Furlong
Thank you for your request for an internal review of your query, N1172. I will look into the Council's reply for you, and send you a response in due course.
Kind regards
Miriam Townsend

Information Governance Officer
North Yorkshire County Council
01609 536985

show quoted sections

Dear Infogov - Veritau,

I would be grateful if you could let me know when I can expect a response to my request for internal review.

Yours sincerely,

John Furlong

North Yorkshire Council

Thank you for contacting North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC). We confirm
that we have received your correspondence.
 
If you have submitted a new Freedom of Information (FOI) or Environmental
Information Regulations (EIR) request to NYCC - we will contact you as
soon as possible if we need any more information from you to respond to
your request. If we do not need any more information we will pass your
request onto the appropriate officer to respond. A response will be sent
to you as soon as possible, and within 20 working days as required by the
relevant legislation.
 
If you have requested an internal review of an FOI or EIR response sent to
you by NYCC or otherwise expressed dissatisfaction about an FOI or EIR
response – we will respond to you as soon as possible and within 20
working days, in accordance with best practice guidance.
 
If you have raised a data protection concern about the way in which NYCC
has handled your personal information – we will respond to you as soon as
possible and within 20 working days, in accordance with legal
requirements/best practice guidance.
 
If you have asked to be removed from a mailing list – we will forward your
request onto the relevant department for action.
 
If your correspondence relates to an existing case - we will forward it to
the relevant officer for consideration and action as required.
 
Copied correspondence - we do not respond to correspondence that has been
copied to us.
 
For any other enquiry – NYCC will contact you shortly.
 
If your enquiry is urgent and you request an immediate response please
call the information governance team on 01609 532526.
 
Yours faithfully
 
The information governance team

Infogov - Veritau, North Yorkshire Council

Dear Mr Furlong

 

I write in response to your request for an internal review dated 27 July
2016. I have considered your request for review, and the reasons for it. I
am satisfied that section 43 (2) does apply to the information you have
requested. This is because this is a product which has been designed by
the Council and which the Council is considering selling to other
authorities. The Council considers that disclosing the information you
have requested would allow other authorities to recreate with relative
ease the system themselves. In addition to section 43 (2) I consider the
information you have requested is effectively a trade secret and so
consider that section 43 (1) also applies. Disclosure would clearly
prejudice the Council’s commercial interests.

 

This exemption is subject to the public interest. I recognise that there
was limited discussion of the factors in the public interest in the
Council’s response of 5 July 2016. The arguments which you have presented
in your request for review are reasons that disclosure may be in the
public
interest.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
      

 

You have suggested that decisions are taken about children based on the
CAN DO assessment and withholding this information therefore excludes
parents from the decision making process about their children. This is not
the case: the CAN DO assessment is used as one of a range of items which
are considered by a panel. Parents are involved in the CAN-Do itself,
which is an indicative budget and does not constitute a final decision
about funding. Other evidence taken into account includes; parental views;
information from the school/setting; information from other involved
agencies and professionals and anything else considered appropriate.

 

Parents are not only involved in decisions regarding their own children
but more broadly in contributing to and influencing Council policy. The
Council collaborates with an official body, NYPACT, to ensure that parents
view are understood and heard by the Council. This includes working with
reference groups to look at things such as the CAN-Do, where parent views
were represented (spring/summer 2016). In addition, the LA publishes more
information on the local offer website to ensure transparency around
aspects of SEND and there will be updated information related to the
statutory assessment process in the near future. I therefore consider
that, there already exists transparency in Council decisions and parental
involvement in decisions which relate to their child and Council decision.

 

A secondary consideration in the public interest is surrounding the
prejudice to the Council’s commercial interests. I am mindful that it has
never been more important than in the current economic climate for the
Council to be able to capitalise on its resources in order to maximise its
budget to preserve as many public services as possible. Therefore it would
not be in the public interest for the Council to intentionally give up a
potential revenue stream. Should the Council decide in the future that the
sale of its CAN DO system is not viable it would be happy to reconsider
its position.

 

Taking all of the above factors into account I consider that the public
interest at this time is best served by the Council withholding this
information.

 

If you remain dissatisfied you have the right to seek an independent
review from the Information Commissioner. Requests for a review by the
Information Commissioner should be made in writing directly to:

The Information Commissioner

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire SK9 5AF

[1][email address]

Tel: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545 745 (national rate)

Fax: 01625 545 510

 

Yours sincerely

 

Louise Jackson

 

Senior Information Governance Officer

Tel: 01609 79 ext 8233

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections