local authority home to school on-line transport policies ......annex 3: summary of ipesea findings...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Local Authority Home to School On-l ine Transport Policies: Accessibi l i ty and Accuracy
Authors SorchaMcCormackandProfessorLukeClements,
SchoolofLawLeedsUniversity
CarysHughesCerebra
Studentresearchers:VictoriaKelly,HarryChikassamba,MuhammadAimanBinZulkifli,
PanagiotaHadjiconstanti,WinonaKang,LisaNguyen,AmiePearce,FionaForde,AisteAkromaite,NavjhotDhanda,RachelParke,AmyPrewett.
![Page 2: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
CerebraLegalEntitlementsandProblem-Solving(LEaP)Home-SchoolTransportReport
BackgroundofCerebra&LEaP
In2014Cerebra,auniquecharitysetuptohelpimprovethelivesofchildrenwithneurologicalconditions,endowedaresearchChairinLawtosupportdisabledchildrenandtheirfamiliesexperiencingdifficultiesinaccessingtheirstatutoryentitlementstocareandsupportservices.TheprojectisnowbasedattheSchoolofLaw,LeedsUniversity1wheretheresearchprogrammeistitledtheLegalEntitlementsandProblem-Solving(LEaP)Project.
RequestsforadviceandsupportarereceivedandassessedbyCerebrastaff,andthosecasesthatmeetoureligibilitycriteriaarereferredtotheProjectTeamforconsideration.Welistentofamiliesandhelpthemgettheknowledgetheyneedtoaccesshealth,socialcareandothersupportservices.Weidentifythecommonlegalproblemsthatpreventfamiliesgettingaccesstoservicesandwedevelopinnovativewaysofsolvingthoseproblems.AkeyapproachtotacklingacommonlyoccurringproblemistocommissionaresearchprojectwhichbenefitsfromtheSchoolofLaw’sexcellentstudent‘probono’researchers.Weaimtoreachasmanyfamiliesaswecanbysharingoursolutionsaswidelyaspossible.
Aswellashelpingindividualfamilies,theProjectgeneratesvitalinformationforthewiderprogramme.Theresearchaimstoimproveourunderstandingofthedifficultiesfacedbyfamiliesinaccessingsupportservicesandlearninghowtheseproblemscanberesolvedeffectively.Theteamusestheresearchdata(whichisheldsecurelyandanonymised)tostudypracticalproblem-solvingtechniquesandidentifywhichapproachesworkbest,withaviewtorefiningthewayweprovideadviceanddisseminategoodpracticefindingsforthewiderpublicbenefit.
Onecommonlyoccurringproblemfamiliesencounterconcernsdifficultiesinobtainingsuitablelocalauthorityprovidedhometoschooltransport.Thisisaproblemthathasbeenhighlightedbyotherorganisations,2includingaspecific‘focusreport’in2017bythelocalgovernmentombudsman.3Nevertheless,soprevalentweretherequestsreceivedbytheCerebrabasedLEaPteam,thatitwasdecidedthatthistopicshouldbethesubjectofaspecific‘problemsolving’research.ThestudentresearchteamattheSchoolofLawLeedsUniversityhasundertakenthisproject.
1 Initially the research project was based at the Law School Cardiff under the direction of Cerebra Professor Luke Clements. The project moved, with Professor Clements to the School of Law Leeds University in 2016. 2 See for example Burns, J School transport cuts causing 'distress and upheaval (BBC 17 March 2017) and ‘'I can't afford disabled son's school taxi' (BBC 17 March 2017) and Contact-A-Family School transport inquiry (2017). 3 Local government ombudsman All on board? Navigating school transport issues (LGO 2017); summary contained in Annex 4.
![Page 3: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
CONTENTS
Executive Summary PAGE 4 Introduction PAGE 5 Summary of the law PAGE 7 Methodology Overview PAGE 9 The Research Findings PAGE 11 Conclusions & Recommendations PAGE 14
Annex 1: Survey PAGE 16
Annex 2: LEaP case studies PAGE 19
Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24
Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27
Annex 5: Student reflections PAGE 29
Annex 6: Jargon Buster PAGE 34
![Page 4: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Executive Summary
BetweenNovember2016andJanuary2017studentvolunteersattheSchoolofLawanalysedthewebsitesof71Englishlocalauthoritiestoassesstheaccuracyandaccessibilityoftheirinformationconcerningtherightofdisabledchildrentofree(localauthorityfunded)hometoschooltransport.
• Almosthalfofthesiteswereconsidereddifficulttounderstandand/ortonavigate(para4.07);
• Almosthalfofthesitesfailedtoincludementionofoneofthefourstatutorycategories4ofeligiblechildren(para4.09);
• AlmostoneintenofthesitesfailedtomentionthecategoryrelatingtochildrenwithSpecialEducationalNeeds(SEN),mobilityordisabilityproblemsandofthosethatdid,14%referredonlytothosewithSEN(henceexcludingchildrenwithadisabilityormobilityproblem)(para4.09);
• Fouroutoftensitesfailedtoprovideinformationastohowanapplicationcouldbemadeforsupportedschooltransport(para4.13);
• Almostfouroutoftensites‘failedmakeitclearthatchildrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirSEN,disabilityormobilityissuesareentitledtotransport’(para4.10);
• Inmanysitesreferencewasmadetonon-statutory(arguablyunlawful)localcriteriaincluding(para4.10):• ‘parentsareexpectedtodrivechildrenwhohaveatemporarymedicalconditionto
school…’• suchchildren‘willbeconsidered’andarenot‘entitled’;• ‘mobilityissuesmustbe‘significant,long-termandsevere’;• ‘thatpupilswithastatementofSEN/EHCplanmustmaketheirownarrangements
toschool’;• ‘pupilswithSENattendingmainstreamschoolarenotentitledtotransport’.• ‘anEHCPisrequiredtobeentitledtotransport’;• ‘certainlongtermdisabilities[willbeconsidered]’;• ‘firstly,parentsshouldlookforhelpfromfamilymembersandneighbours’;
• OverhalfofthepoliciesfailedtomakeclearthatchildrenwithSEN,disabilityormobility
problemswouldbeassessedonanindividualbasis(para4.11);• Overoneintensitesfailedtoincludeinformationonhowtoappealorcomplainabout
schooltransport.(para4.14);• Thelengthoflocalauthoritypoliciesvariedwidely,withtheshortestatjusttwopages
andthelongestat69.Overathirdwereinexcessof20pagesand(almost)halfofthesecontainednosummary(para4.05);
4 See para 2(a) above.
![Page 5: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
1.Introduction
Whyhometoschooltransport?
1.01 TheCerebraLegalEntitlementsandProblem-Solving(LEaP)Projecthelpsfamiliesofchildrenwithbrainconditionscopewiththelegalbarrierstheyface.Cerebra,auniquecharitysetuptohelpimprovethelivesofchildrenwithneurologicalconditions,providestechnicalsupportandfundingfortheLEAPresearchprogrammewhichisbasedattheSchoolofLaw,LeedsUniversity.Cerebrahasanin-houseresearchandadviceteam.Thisteamprovidessupporttofamiliesincludingadviceconcerningcommonlyoccurringlegalproblemstheyencounterinaccessinghealth,socialcareandsomeeducationneeds.WheretheCerebrain-houseresearchandadviceteamencounteraspecificproblemareathatmanyfamiliesareencounteringthroughoutEnglandand/orWales,itisreferredtotheLEAPprojecttoseeifmoredetailedresearchwillidentifythecauseofthedifficultyandpotentialsystemicremedies.
1.02 Accesstofree(localauthorityfunded)hometoschooltransportfordisabledchildrenisonesuchproblem:suchtransportisacrucialservicefordisabledchildrenandtheirfamilies.ReferralstotheCerebrain-houseadviceteamconcerningdifficultieswithschooltransporthavebeenoneofthemostcommonproblemsithasencountered,amountingin2015to17%ofallcases,risingto19%in2016.Discussionswithothercharitiesprovidingadvicefordisabledchildrenandtheirfamiliesindicatedthattheytoohadidentifiedthisissueasaparticularproblemarea.Preliminaryanalysisofthewebsitesofanumberoflocalauthoritiesrevealedthatmuchoftheinformationtheypresentedwasdifficulttounderstandand/orincompatiblewiththerelevantlegislation.Studentvolunteerswerethereforeaskedtoconductareviewofasampleoflocalauthorities’onlinetransportpoliciestoassesstheextentoftheproblem.
Lawandsocialcontext
1.03 LocalauthoritiesinEnglandhaveadutyundersection508(B)andSchedule35BoftheEducationAct1996toprovidetransportforchildren‘whocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolduetotheirspecialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityproblems’.Thestatutoryguidance5statesthatlocalauthoritiesneedtoconsiderwhetherachildcouldreasonablybeexpectedtowalkifaccompaniedand,ifso,whetherthechild’sparent(s)canreasonablybeexpectedtoaccompanythechild.Indeterminingeligibility,localauthoritiesarerequiredtoconsiderarangeoffactors,includingtheageofthechildandwhetheronewouldordinarilyexpectachildofthatagetobeaccompanied.
5 Department for Education, Home to school travel and transport guidance: statutory guidance for local authorities, July 2014
![Page 6: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
1.04 CasesreferredtotheLEaPProjecthaveconcernedarangeofdifficultiesthatfamiliesexperienceinobtainingsuitableschooltransport,including:• theunsuitabilityofanindividual’stransportarrangements(forexample,dueto
journeylength,stress,noiselevels,changesintheratioofescortstopupils,changesinthemodeoftransportetc.);
• therefusaltoprovidetransportforchildrenwithdisabilitiesorspecialeducationalneedswholivewithinthestatutorywalkingdistance6oftheirschool;
• inadequatedriverandescorttraining;• latearrivalatschoolasaresultofreconfiguredroutes;• afailuretoprovidetransporttoaschoolnamedinanindividual’sstatementof
specialeducationalneedsorEducation,HealthandCareplan;• thewithdrawaloftransportatshortnoticebytransportprovidersonthe
groundsofachild’schallengingbehaviour;• delaysinmakingalternativetransportarrangements.
1.05 ThemostcommonproblemreferredtotheLEaPProjecthasbeentherefusaltoprovidetransportforchildrenwithdisabilitiesorspecialeducationalneeds(SEN)wholivewithintherelevantstatutorywalkingdistance7fromtheirnearestsuitableschool.
1.06 Someofthewaysinwhichlocalauthoritieshavemisinterpretedtheirstatutoryduties(moreparticularlydescribedinAnnex2below)include:• imposinga‘blanketban’ontheprovisionoftransportforanychildwholives
withinwalkingdistanceoftheirnearestsuitableschool(regardlessoftheirabilitytowalktoschool-aloneoraccompanied);
• excludinganyreferenceintheirtransportpoliciestochildrenwhoareeligiblefortransportundertheEducationAct1996(i.e.becausetheycannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschool,duetotheirspecialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityissues);
• providingtransportonadiscretionarybasis,ratherthanasastatutoryentitlement;
• providingincorrectinformationtoparentsofdisabledchildrenastotheirrights;• requiringparentswhohaveaccesstoavehicletodrivetheirchildrentoschool;• poorcommunicationissuesbetweenLA’sandparents;• expectingfamiliestousedisabilitybenefitstocovertransportcosts.
6 In England, the walking distance is 2 miles for children aged under 8 and 3 miles for children aged 8 and over. 7 These cases have been anonymised.
![Page 7: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
2.Summaryofthelaw
2.01 TheEducationAct1996istheprimarylegislationthatgovernshometoschooltransportdutiesinEngland.Section35Bidentifiesfourcategoriesofchildrenwhoareentitledtofreetransport,theyare:
• Childrenwholiveoutsidethe‘walkingdistance’;8• Childrenfromlowincomefamilies;• Childrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseofthe
natureoftheroute;and• Childrenwhocan’treasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheir
specialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityproblems.
2.02 Itisthefourthcategorywithwhichthisreportismostconcerned:wherebecauseofachild’sspecialeducationalneed(SEN),disabilityormobilityproblemtheycannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschool.9Although‘reasonable’isnotdefinedintheAct,guidancehasstressedthatallchildrenmustbeassessedonanindividualbasis10-whichmeansthatrigid‘blanket’policiesarenotpermitted.ExamplesencounteredbytheLEaPProjectofwhereitmaybeunreasonableforachildtobeexpectedtowalkunaccompaniedorotherwisemightincludewherethechildconcerned:
• experiencesphysicalpainorhasdifficultywalkinglongdistances;• hasbladderorbowelproblems;• isvulnerableorunabletounderstanddangers;• isunabletonegotiatetheroutetoschoolbecauseofbusy/difficultroutes;• hasunpredictablebehaviour
2.03 Whenconsideringthe‘reasonableness’ofthisexpectation,authoritiesareentitledto
considerwhetherthechildcouldwalktoschoolifaccompaniedbyaparent.Theguidancestatesthataparentisgenerallyexpectedtoaccompanytheirchildtoschool‘unlessthereisgoodreasonwhyitisnotreasonableforaparenttodoso’.11CircumstancesencounteredbytheLEaPProjectofwhereitmaybeunreasonableforaparenttoaccompanytheirchildtoschoolcaninclude:
• aparentmaybeunabletoensurethesafetyofachildwhohasunpredictableorchallengingbehaviour;
8 The walking distance is 2 miles for children under the age of 8 & 3 miles for children aged 8 and over see Section 444(5) of the Education Act 1996. 9 Other criteria such as must be of compulsory school age, be within the walking distance and attend the nearest qualifying school must be met. For further detail on Home to School Transport law please see Cerebra’s Guidance. 10 Department for Education, ‘New home to school transport & travel guidance’ [2014] part 4 11 Department for Education, Home to school travel and transport guidance: Statutory guidance for local authorities, July 2014, paragraphs 17 & 18.
![Page 8: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
• aparentmayhaveadisabilitywhichpreventshim/herfromwalkingachildtoschool;
• theparent’sjourneytoandfromschoolcouldtakeanunreasonableamountoftime;
• thechild’ssiblingsmayneedtobetakentodifferentschools;• thechild’ssiblingsmayhavetobeleftathomeunattendedbeforeandafter
schoolifaparenthastoaccompanythechildtoschool.
2.04 TheGuidancestatesinadditionthatanassessmentof‘reasonablenesswouldalsoconsider‘theageofthechildandwhetheronewouldordinarilyexpectachildofthatagetobeaccompanied’.12Forexampleifthechildis15,thequestiontobeaskedis‘woulditbereasonabletoexpectaparenttoaccompanytheir15yearoldchildwithoutadisabilitytoschool?Iftheanswerisno,thenitwouldbediscriminatorytoexpectaparenttoaccompanytheir15yearoldsimplybecausetheyhadadisability.
2.05 Ininterpretingthestatutoryprovisions,otherrelevantlegalconsiderationsinclude:• ‘Disability’asawideconcept,includinginadditiontophysicalimpairments,
mentalimpairmentsandillnesses;• Localauthoritypoliciescannotimposeadditional(ormoredemanding)
requirementsbeyondthosedetailedinthelegislation;• ItisnotaprerequisiteforachildtohaveaStatementofSENorEducation,Health
&CarePlan.• ParentsshouldnotberequiredtouseDLA(DisabilityLivingAllowance)topayfor
theschooltransportrequiredbythedisabledchild;• Evidencefromprofessionalsmaysupportatransportapplicationbutisnota
legalrequirement.
DetailedinformationontherightsofdisabledchildrentofreehometoschooltransportinEnglandisprovidedintheCerebra’sSchoolTransport:AGuideforParents.13
12 Department for Education, Home to school travel and transport guidance: Statutory guidance for local authorities, July 2014, paragraphs 17 & 18. 13 Cerebra School Transport: A guide to Parents in England (2016) at http://w3.cerebra.org.uk/help-and-information/guides-for-parents/school-transport-a-guide-for-parents-in-england/
![Page 9: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
3.Methodology-overview3.01 Theresearchstudyfocusedonchildrenofcompulsoryschoolage14withinEnglishlocal
authorities.Welshauthoritieswerenotanalysedduetotimeconstraintsandthedifferenceintheapplicablelaw.Authoritieswerechosenatrandom,selectedfromlistsdesignedtoprovideageographicalmixthatincludedUnitaryauthorities,CountyCouncils,MetropolitanandLondonboroughs.71authoritiesweresurveyedwhichrepresentsalmost47%ofthe152Englishauthoritieswithschooltransportresponsibilities.Thesamequestionnairewasappliedtoeachauthority.
3.02 Thequestionnairelargelyconsistedofaseriesofclosed-ended/quantitativequestions.Whererelevantthesequestionswerefollowedbyasupplementaryopen-format‘commentbox’enablingthestudentstoexpressanopinionandcapturequalitativedata.AcopyofthequestionnairecanbefoundinAnnex1.
3.03 TheLocalAuthoritywebsiteswereanalysedbetweenNovember2016andJanuary2017.Therewere12studentvolunteers,10ofwhomwereUndergraduateandtwoPostgraduatestudents.ThreestudentshadEnglishasasecondlanguage.Thestudentsworkedinthreegroupsthatwereeachrandomlyassignedsixwebsitestoreview.
3.04 Thestudentshadthreetrainingsessionsconcerninglocalauthoritylegaldutiestoprovideschooltransportaswellaskeyissuesthatshouldbeincludedinanypolicy.AsamplewebsitewasusedtofamiliarisethestudentswiththekeycriteriathatshouldbelocatedinaHome-schooltransportpolicy.Thepurposeofthisbasictrainingwastoequatetheirknowledgetothatofaparentratherthanalawyer.Thetrainingwasdonetoensureaconsistencyofapproachtotheuseofthequestionnaire–butithadtheinevitabledistortingeffectoffamiliarisingthestudentswiththelawandtherequiredinformationresources.Accordingly,itisreasonabletoassumethattheywouldhavehadmorelegalknowledgethanmanyfamilies:i.e.agreaterawarenessofwhatinformationauthoritiesshouldprovide(andtheformatinwhichitshouldbemadeavailable).
3.05 ThequestionnairewasinformedbyarangeofissuesthattheCerebraLEaPProjecthadencounteredconcerningschooltransportissuesovertheprevious2years.Inparticular,itwasdesignedtoobtainqualitativeandquantitativedataastowhethertheLApolicies:• wereeasilyaccessibleforparentcarers;• wereup-to-dateandaccuratelyreflectedthecurrentlaw• wereconcise,userfriendlyandeasy-to-understand;• explainedinsimpletermsthecorrectgroupsofchildrenentitledtofreehometo
schooltransport;• imposedadditional–non-statutory-eligibilitycriteria;
14 5-16 year olds.
![Page 10: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
• providedinformationastohowtoapplyfortransportsupportandhowtochallengearefusaltoprovidesuchsupport;
3.06 Thestudentswhocompletedthesurveyswerealsoaskedtowriteaone-paragraphreflectionpieceonhowtheyfoundtheexperienceofattemptingtoaccesstherelevantinformation.ThesecanbefoundinAnnex5.
3.07 Althoughthestudentswereallocatedatotalof71councilwebsitestoanalysetheoverallreportingsamplevariedforthefollowingreasons:• threewebsitewereconsideredtobecompletelyinaccessibleasatransport
policycouldnotbefound;• onewebsiterequiredanaccounttobecreatedbeforeaccesswasgrantedwhich
wasnotfeasibleinthisstudy;• fiveoftheremaining(67)websitesfailedtocontainanactualtransportpolicy-
merelyprovidingasummaryofthelawandentitlementstoschooltransport;• inafurtherfouroftheseremaining(67)websites’policiescouldnotbefoundby
‘clicking’onlinksandstudentshadtoresorttoGoogleortotheuseofsearchbartools.Forthepurposeofthesurvey,thisfailurewasscoredas11clicks(i.e.twicetheaverageforthesitesthatcouldbefoundbythestudentsusinglinks).
![Page 11: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
4.Theresearchfindings
Accessibility–identificationi.e.‘clicks’
4.01 Notwithstandingthewiderangeoffunctionsdischargedbylocalauthorities,categorisationstudiessuggestthatlargescalewebsitescan(andshould)haveanavigationstructurethatlimitsthenumberoflevelsthatsitevisitorshavetoworktheirwaythrough;15thatif‘usersareforcedtoclickthroughmorethanfourorfivelevels,theymaysimplygiveup’.16Studentswerenotinstructedontheintricaciesofwebsitehierarchicalnavigationsystems,orthevariousmechanismsthatcanbeusedtomakesitesaccessible(suchasdrop-downmenus,cascadingmenusandthelike)orinaccessiblelabyrinths.Thequestionnairesimplyposedaseriesofquestionsdesignedtoobtaintheirobjectiveandsubjectiveviewsonsiteaccessibility.
4.02 Thenumberof‘clicks’thatstudentshadtouseinordertoidentifythe‘hometoschooltransportpolicies’onlocalauthoritywebsiteswasonaverage5.5,17suggestingthatthemajorityofsiteswereinaccessibleonthebasisof‘InformationArchitecture’studies’.18(inaddition,infourothercasesthepolicieshadtobefoundusing‘Google’and/orthesearchbartools-seenoteatpara3.07above).
4.03 Infourcases19therelevantpoliciescouldnotbeaccessedatall.
Accessibility-policylength
4.04 Threesites20didnothaveanaccessiblehometoschoolonlinetransportpolicy,onecouldonlybeaccessedviaanaccountandfiveothersmerelycontainedsummariesratherthanafullpolicy.Thefollowingresultsarethereforebasedonasamplesizeof62.Thetotallengthofthesepoliciesamountedto1,187pages,rangingfrom2pagesto69.Theaveragelengthofthepoliciesanalysedwas19pages.
4.05 Theredoesnotappeartobeaconsensusonpolicylength,howeveritcouldbearguedthatapolicycouldbecondensedtonomorethan10pageswhich26%ofLA’smanagedinoursurvey.However,39%ofwebsiteshadpoliciesthatwere20pagesorlonger,including18%ofthosewhichwere30pagesormore,makingthetaskofaccessingbasiclegalrightsinformationmorearduous.Ifasummarythatdetailedthebasicprinciplesofthepolicywasavailable,thiscouldassistparentsonhowtofindoutmoreinformation.Although55%ofLAwebsitesofferedsuchasummary,unfortunately,45%reliedonthepolicyalone.
15 See for example Lou Rosenfeld and Peter Morville Information Architecture for the World Wide Web: Designing Large-scale Web Sites (O'Reilly Media 1998). 16 Peter Morville Information Architecture on the World Wide Web (1998) p35 17 n = 67: the variation being from 2 to 11. 18 Ibid. 19 N = 71: i.e. 4.2% of the sample. 20 N = 71 i.e. 4% of the sample.
![Page 12: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
4.06 Studentscommentedthatlongand‘drawnout’policiesmadeitdifficulttoidentifyrelevantinformation.Studentsalsoreferredtothetime-consumingandtediousnatureofreadingtheselongpoliciesandsuggestedthatparentsofdisabledchildrenmighthavedifficultyincommittingthesameamountoftimeandenergy,giventheircaringresponsibilities.
Accessibility–comprehensibility(samplesize62)
4.07 Thesurveyaskedstudentstoexaminethe‘user-friendliness’ofthepoliciesexamined.Thequantitativedatagatheredshowedthatalmosthalf(48%)ofpolicieswerenotconsideredtobeuserfriendly.
4.08 Thosethatwereviewedinapositivelightwerenotedasbeing‘straight-forward’with‘nolegaljargon’andwere‘brief’.Othercharacteristicsincludedtheuseofanindex,quicklinks,brochurestyleorQ&Aformat,andthosewithseparatesectionsforeachcategory.Similarthemesaroseintheremainingpoliciesthatwereconsiderednottobeuserfriendly,suchasbeing‘toolong’,‘toocomplex’,‘toomuchinformation’,toomuch‘legaljargon’andoverreferenceto‘statute’.Othercommentsmentionedconfusingintroductions,thedifficultyinfindinginformation,unnecessarilydrawingoncaselaw,theabsenceofstructure–i.e.nobulletpointsandun-invitinglongblackandwhitepdf.textwithconfusinglanguage.
Legalcontent–alllegalrightscovered(samplesize62)
4.09 Almosthalfofthewebsites(48%)omittedatleastoneofthefourcategoriesofeligiblechildrenandalmostoneinten(9%)failedtomentionthecategoryrelatingtochildrenwithSEN,mobilityordisabilityproblems.Ofthosethatdidmentionthiscategory,14%referredonlytochildrenwithSENhenceexcludingthosewholackedSENbuthadadisabilityormobilityproblem.
4.10 Underthequestion‘doesthepolicymakeitclearthatchildrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirSEN,disabilityormobilityissuesareentitledtotransport’itwasfoundthat39%ofpoliciesdidnotmakethisrightclear-withcommentsreferringtorestrictiveandorextracriteriaincluding:• ‘parentsareexpectedtodrivechildrenwhohaveatemporarymedicalcondition
toschool’‘;• suchchildren‘willbeconsidered’(ratherthanbeing‘‘entitled’);’• ‘mobilityissuesmustbe‘significant,long-termandsevere’;• ‘thatpupilswithastatementofSEN/EHCplanmustmaketheirown
arrangementstoschool’;• ‘pupilswithSENattendingmainstreamschoolarenotentitledtotransport’;• ‘anEHCPisrequiredtobeentitledtotransport’;• ‘certainlongtermdisabilities[willbeconsidered]’;
![Page 13: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
• ‘firstly,parentsshouldlookforhelpfromfamilymembersandneighbours’.
4.11 Moreover,despiteclearlegalrequirementsundersection508(B)andSchedule35BoftheEducationAct1996andpara16of‘theGuidance’,21inoverhalfoftheresearchsample(53%)itwasnotapparentthatchildrenwithSEN,disabilityormobilityproblemswouldbeassessedonanindividualbasis.ConsideringthefactthateligibilityfortransportofchildrenwithSEN,disabilityormobilityproblemsdependsontheindividualcircumstancesofthechildandparent,individualassessmentsareessential.
4.12 ThesefindingsconfirmtheconcernsidentifiedbytheLEaPProjectandotherbodies:22thatmanylocalauthoritiesarenotassessingeligibilitybasedonthelawandguidance.Instead,theirstaffappearstobeguidedbyincorrectinformationastoindividualrights;bypoliciesthatexcludereferencestotheSEN,mobilityanddisabilitycategory;byanexpectationthatparentswilldrivetheirchildrentoschool;andbythenotionthatsuchsupportismerely‘discretionary’.
Detailsofhowtoapplyandappeal(samplesize67)
4.13 40%ofwebsitesfailedtoprovideany(orsufficientand/orcomprehensible)detailsastohowanapplicationforfreeschooltransportcouldbemade.Thefactthatsomelocalauthoritieshadeasilyaccessibleapplicationformssuggeststhatthisisnotdifficultforlocalauthoritiestoprovide.Thisinturncallsintoquestionwhyfourouteverytenauthoritiesfailedtohavethisfacility.
4.14 Almostafifthofsites(18%)failedtoprovidedetailsofhowarefusalofschooltransportsupportcouldbechallenged,althoughofthosesitesthatdidcontainthisinformation,studentresearcherscommentedthatsomeappearedoutdated,withmanylocalauthoritiesrequiringappealstobesentbypost.
21 Department for Education, Home to school travel and transport guidance: Statutory guidance for local authorities, July 2014, paragraph 16. 22 As discussed in paras 1.04, 1,06 and in Annex 2, 3 & 4.
![Page 14: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
5.Conclusionsandrecommendations5.01 Theresearchhasidentifiedwidespreadandseriouslegalfailingsbylocalauthorities.
Itisnotunreasonabletosuggestthatthisis,attheveryleast,reckless:inthesensethatitisprobablycosteffectivenottoprovideclearandconciseinformationasthiswilldetersfamilies’fromaccessingtheirstatutoryentitlements.TheseparateevidenceprovidedbytheLEaPProject,othercharitiesandthelocalgovernmentombudsman,doesnotallaythistroublingpossibility.
5.02 Studentswereabletoidentifyseveralwebsitesthattheyconsideredtobesuccinctinsomeareas,butfailedtoidentifywebsitesthat‘tickedalltheboxes’.Somepoliciescontainedaccuratestatementsastothelaw,butwerehiddenwithinlengthyunfriendlydocuments;whereasothershadclearandconciseapplicationforms,butfailedtoidentifyallgroupsofeligiblechildren.This(andtheseveralexcellentguidesissuedbyorganisationssuchasCerebraandContact-a-Family)suggeststhatdevelopingauser-friendlyresourceisnotanoverlycomplexexercise.GiventhenumberofcomplaintsthathavebeenmadetotheLEaPProject,theconcernsofothercharitiesinvolvedinthisfield,thelocalgovernment2017reporttogetherwiththedifficultiesidentifiedbythisresearch,therewouldappeartobeaneedforcentralgovernmentaction.
5.03 Bywayofanexample:asaresultofareferral,LEaPmadeaformalcomplainttoanauthorityandinduecourseitconcededthatitspolicyanditsdecisionwerewronganditagreedtoprovidethenecessarytransport.Italsoagreedtochangetheinformationonitswebsitetoreflectthecorrectlegalposition.However,theprojectthenreceivedanotherreferralfromadifferentparentinthesamearea.Onceagain,theauthorityconcededitwasinerror.Despitethis,Cerebrareceivedafurtherreferralfromthesamearea,suggestingthatalthoughtheirwrittenpolicyhadchanged,theirfrontlinepracticeshadnot;thattheirformshadnotandthattheirstaffhadnotreceivedtrainingtochangethewaytheyimplementedthelaw.
5.04 Addressingtheproblemthereforerequiresactiontochangeentrenchedlocalorganisationalpracticesandcultures.DespitethetenacityandbesteffortsoftheCerebrahelp-line–andoftheothercharitiesconcernedaboutthisissue–ithasnotprovedpossibletobringabout‘acrosstheboard’organisationalchange.
Thenecessaryremedialaction
5.05 Theevidenceprovidedinthisreportstronglysuggeststhatmanylocalauthoritieshavefailedtodischargeadequatelytheirstatutorydutiesunderthe1996Act.TheSecretaryofStatewouldappeartobeunderapubliclawdutytohaveregardtothesefindingsandtoconsidertakingactiontoaddressthisfailure.Onematerialconsiderationwouldbetheexerciseofherdefaultpowers(forexampleundersection497oftheEducationAct1996).WhilethedecisionastowhatconstitutesappropriateremedialactionisfortheSecretaryofState,itwouldappearthatsome
![Page 15: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
formofremedialactionmustbeforthcoming.Revisedcentralgovernmentguidancewouldalsoappearessentialincluding,forexample:• Theprovisionofanaccessibletemplatestatement(tobeusedonalllocal
authoritywebsite)astotheentitlementsofchildrentofreehometoschooltransport;
• arequirementthatblanketstatementsandrestrictivecriteriaforchildrenwithSEN,mobilityordisabilityproblemsberemoved;
• arequirementthatthatallfourcategorieseligibleforfreeschooltransportshouldbedetailedcorrectlyinthepolicyandpolicysummary;
• arequirementthatpoliciesshouldavoidlegalisticlanguage,bewrittenineasytounderstandlanguage,haveanindexandclearhyperlinkedheadingstohelpnavigation;
• theprovisionofapplicationandappealforms;• arequirementofregularstafftrainingtoensureproperimplementationand
interpretationofthelawinpractice.
![Page 16: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Annex1Survey
SchoolTransportSurvey
NameofGroup______________________________
NameofLocalAuthority________________________
Date_________________
Q1.Howmany‘clicks’didittaketofindtheschooltransportinformationfrom theLA’shomepage?
Q2. Howmanypageslongisthepolicy?
Q3.Isthereasummaryofthepolicy?(eitheronthewebpageorasaseparatedownloadabledocument)
Yes/No
Webpage/Pdf.
Q4.Istheinformationwrittenineasy-to-understandlanguage?23
Comments
23 Note the user-friendliness of the policy
![Page 17: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Q.5Howmanyofthegroupsof‘eligible’childrendoesthepolicyinclude?
Childrenunabletowalkduetosafetyoftheroute
Childrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirspecialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityproblems
Childrenfromlow-incomefamilies
Childrenwholivebeyondthestatutorywalkingdistance
Q.6DoesthepolicymakeitclearthatchildrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirSEN,disabilityormobilityissuesareentitledtotransport?
Comments
Q.7DoesthepolicyrefertoallchildrenwithSEN,disabilitiesormobilityissues,orjusttothosewithstatements/EHCPs?
Comments
![Page 18: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Q.8Doesthepolicymakeitclearthatchildrenshouldbeassessedonanindividualbasistoidentifytheirparticulartransportrequirements?
Comments
Q.9Isthereaclearexplanationhowparentscanapplyfortransport?
Yes/No
Comments
Q.10Isthereinformationonhowtoappeal/complain?
Yes/No
Comments
![Page 19: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Annex2
LEaPCasestudies
Cerebra’sLegalEntitlementsandProblem-Solving(LEaP)Project
Cerebra’sLegalEntitlementsandProblem-Solving(LEaP)Projectfocusesoncaseswhichhavethepotentialtoaffectalargenumberoffamilies,withaviewtodisseminatingthelessonslearnedandmaximisingtheimpactofourresearch.SchooltransporthasbeenoneofthemostcommonproblemsreferredtotheLEaPProject.In2015,17%ofLEaPcasesrelatedtoschooltransport,risingto19%in2016.Thecaseworkhasshownthatsomeschooltransportpoliciesareincompatiblewiththerelevantlegislation,asaresultofwhichchildrenwithdisabilitiesorspecialeducationalneedsarebeingdeniedtheirstatutoryrighttotransportassistance.StudentsparticipatingintheCerebraSchoolTransportResearchProjectattheUniversityofLeedshavethereforebeenaskedtoconductareviewofsamplelocalauthorities’onlinetransportpoliciestoassesstheextentoftheproblem.BelowarecasestudiesbasedonreferralsreceivedbytheCerebraLEaPhelpline.
Casestudy1–MrsA,MrBandMrsC24
MrsA25contactedtheLEaPProjectforadviceabouther14yearoldson,X,whohasDown’ssyndromeandattendsaschoolwhichis2.7milesfromhishome.AlocalauthorityinEnglandhadrefusedtransportforXonthegroundsthathelivedwithinthestatutorywalkingdistancefromhisschool.Thecouncil’spolicystatedthattransportwasnotprovidedforchildrenwhohadspecialeducationalneeds(butnotastatement)unlesstherewere‘exceptionalandcompellingreasons’.Thepolicyalsostatedthatspecialeducationalneedstransportwouldonlybeprovidedatthecouncil’sdiscretionandwhere‘parentsdonothavethemeanstotransportorarrangeforotherstotransporttheirchildtoschool’.MrsAhadcompletedthefirststageoftheappealprocesswithoutsuccessandwasproceedingtothesecondstage.MrsAsuccessfullyappealedwithsupportfromtheLEaPProject.ThelocalauthorityreinstatedX’stransport,updatedtheinformationpublishedonitswebsiteandarrangedforaleadofficerfromthedisabilityteamtooverseefuturetransportdecisions.
MrB26,wholivedinthesamelocalauthorityareaasMrsA,contactedtheLEaPProjectatthesametimeabouthis15yearolddaughter,Y,whohasgloballearningdelayandautistictraits.MrBhadalreadyexhaustedthelocalauthority’stwo-stageappealprocess.ThecouncilhadrefusedtransportonthegroundsthatYlivedwithinthestatutorywalkingdistancefromherschool.ThecouncilacknowledgedthatYwasunabletowalkandneededtobetransportedtoschool,butstatedthat‘therearetwoparentswhocouldgetherto
25 Cerebra reference 2014/52 26 Cerebra reference 2014/51
![Page 20: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
school’andthatitwas‘reasonabletoexpectparentswhohaveacartotransporttheirchildtoschool’.Thecouncilalsostatedthattherewere‘numerousparentsin[thelocalauthorityarea]whoworkandhavetogettheirchildrentoschoolandworkofitselfisnotseenasanexceptionalcircumstancewherethecouncilshouldprovidetransportassistance’.Assuch,theystatedthattherewere‘noexceptionalreasonstodeviatefrompolicy’.WithsupportfromtheLEaPProject,MrBchallengedthelocalauthority’sdecisiontowithdrawtransport.ThelocalauthorityreinstatedY’stransportandMrBreceivedfeedbackfromotherfamiliesintheareathattheirrefusalshadbeenoverturned.
Unfortunately,severalmonthslater,LEaPreceivedasimilarreferralfromthesamelocalauthorityarea.MrsC27contactedtheprojectteamregardingherunsuccessfulapplicationfortransportforher11yearoldsonZ,whohasAspergersSyndromeandwhoseschoolis2.5milesfromhishome.Although,thelocalauthorityhadamendedtheirpolicytoreflectthiscategory,MrsC’sapplicationwasrefusedonthegroundsthat‘thedistancefromhometoschoolislessthanthestatutorywalkingdistanceof3miles’andshewas‘notinreceiptofaqualifyingbenefittobeeligibleforlowincometransport’.
Atthefirststageappeal,thepanelupheldtherefusaltoprovidetransportandstatedthatitwas‘deemedparentalpreference’tosendZtohisschool,despitethefactthatZ’sschoolhadbeennamedbythelocalauthorityinhisEducation,HealthandCareplanwithnoconditionsrelatingtotransport.MrsCproceededtoasecondstageappealwithsupportfromtheProjectTeam.MrsCreceivedaphonecallfromthetransportteamat4.30pmonthedaybeforethescheduledsecondstageappealhearingadvisingthatZwouldbegrantedtransport.
Inordertotryandensurethatthepolicychangeswereimplementedinpractice,theProjectTeamwrotetotheauthority’sMonitoringOfficer28toexpressitsconcernthattherevisedpolicywasnotbeingimplemented.TheMonitoringOfficerrepliedthattheauthority’slegalteamhadbeenworkingwiththetransportteam‘toreviewtheirpractice,soastoensureitslegality’.Todate,theLEaPProjecthasnotreceivedanysimilarreferralsfromotherparentsinthislocalauthorityarea.
Casestudy2–MrsBlack29
MrsBlackcontactedtheLEaPProjectinMarch2016regardinganunsuccessfulschooltransportapplicationherson,Joe.Joeisalmost12yearsoldandhaslearningdifficulties;helives2.2milesawayfromhissecondaryspecialschool.Joe’sEducation,HealthandCareplanconfirmsthathe’sunabletowalktoschoolindependentlybecauseofhislearningdifficulties.MrsBlackhasbeendiagnosedwithamedicalconditionthatmeanssheisunabletowalklongdistances.Thelocalauthoritydeniedtransportastheylived‘within3miles27 Cerebra reference 2015/42 28 (a council officer who has a statutory duty to ensure that the council is acting lawfully) 29 Cerebra reference 2016/21
![Page 21: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
walkingdistanceoftheschool’andinsteadinvitedhertoapplyfortransporton‘medicalgrounds’.
Thecouncil’s2016/17EducationTravelPolicydidnotrecognisethatchildrenwhocouldnotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirspecialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityproblemshadastatutoryentitlementtoschooltransport.Instead,thepolicystatedthat:
‘TheLAwillexerciseitsdiscretiontoprovidetransportassistancewhereachildisunabletowalktoschoolbecauseofamedicalconditionordisabilityandtheparentcandemonstratethattheywouldotherwisebeunabletogetthechildtoandfromschool...Inallcases,theLAwillconsidertheavailabilityofhelpfromimmediateandextendedfamilymembersandfromneighbours.TheavailabilityofhelpthroughaSchoolTravelPlanwillbeconsideredaswilltheuseofanydisabilitybenefitstohelpsecureattendance.Itisexpectedthattheparentwillhavemadeeveryreasonableefforttosecureotherhelp.TheLAmayseekconfirmationofthisfromtheparent,schoolorotheragencies.’
OnadvicefromtheProjectTeam,MrsBlackrequestedtransportonthebasisthatshecouldnotreasonablybeexpectedtoaccompanyJoe,givenhisageandherownill-health.TheProjectTeamalsohighlightedtheshortcomingsofthecouncil’stransportpolicy.TheauthorityacceptedthatJoewasnotabletowalktoschoolindependently,butrefusedtransportonthebasisthatMrsBlackhadnotprovidedanyevidencetosuggestthatshecouldnotbeexpectedtofulfilherparentalresponsibilitybyaccompanyingJoetoschool.MrsBlackwasinvitedtorequestan‘exceptionalcircumstances’reviewbyaSeniorOfficerPanel.WithsupportfromtheProjectTeam,MrsBlackaskedthepaneltoreassessherapplicationandconsidertheinconsistenciesinthepolicy.ThepaneldecidedthatJoewouldreceivediscretionarytransporttoschool(tobereviewedinlightofhermedicalcondition),onthegroundsofMrsBlack’sownmedicalcondition,untilshewas‘deemedphysicallyabletoescort[Joe]toschoolbyamedicalprofessional’.
TheProjectTeamcontactedthecouncil’sMonitoringOfficertoexpressconcernaboutthecouncil’srationaleforprovidingtransportanditsfailuretorespondtoconcernsaboutthepolicy.
Thecouncilagreedtoamenditstransportpolicysothatitreferredtoalleligiblechildren,includingthosewhocouldnotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirSEN,disabilityormobilityissues.However,inresponsetorepeatedrequestsforconfirmationofJoe’sstatutoryentitlementtotransport,thecouncilhasconfirmeditsbeliefthatheisnotaneligiblechildandthatitdoesnothaveastatutorydutytoprovidetransport.ThecouncilmaintainsthatJoe’stransportisprovidedonadiscretionarybasisonthegroundsthathismotherisunabletoaccompanyhimtoschoolbecauseofherownmedicalcondition.Thecouncilsaysthatithas‘consideredwhether[Joe]couldreasonablybeexpectedtowalkifaccompanied,andifso,whetherhismothercanreasonablybeexpected
![Page 22: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
toaccompanyhim.Thefactthatheis12yearsolddoesnotmeanthathismothercannot‘reasonablybeexpectedtoaccompany’him,especiallyinviewofhisneeds’(ouremphasis).
Thecouncilinthiscaseappearstoholdtwocontradictoryviews.Ontheonehand,theyarguethatJoeisnotentitledtotransportbyright,becauseMrsBlackcanreasonablybeexpectedtoaccompanyhim(eventhoughheisnearly12yearsold).YetthecouncilacceptsthatMrsBlackisphysicallyunabletoaccompanyJoebecauseofhermedicalconditionandhehasthereforebeengivendiscretionarytransport.Assuch,theProjectTeamaresupportingMrsBlacktomakeacomplainttotheLocalGovernmentOmbudsman.
IssuesarisingfromtheLEaPcases
AnumberofcommonthemeshaveemergedfromthecasesreferredtotheLEaPProject:
Failuretodischargestatutoryduties:InlightofthereferralsreceiveditisevidentthatsomelocalauthoritiesinEnglandarefailingtorecognisethatchildrenwhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalktoschoolbecauseoftheirspecialeducationalneeds,disabilityormobilityproblemsareentitledtofreehometoschooltransportundertheEducationAct1996.Insomecases,localauthoritiesappeartobetryingtoshifttheresponsibilityformakingsuitabletransportarrangementstoparentsofdisabledchildren
Discriminatorypolicies/practice:Itappearsthatsomelocalauthoritiesareexpectingparentstowalktheirdisabledchildrentoschool,evenwherethechildisbeyondtheageatwhichtypicalchildrenwouldceasetobeaccompanied.Thisinevitablymakesitverydifficultforparentstocontinueinfull-timeemploymentormeetothercommitments.
FailuretomakesystemicchangesWhilsttherehavebeensomesuccessfulreferralswherelocalauthoritieshaveeventuallyacceptedtheirdutytoprovidetransportthereappearstobeafailuretochangetheirpracticesasaresult.Sometimestheyfailtoimplementchangestopolicyandpracticeatanorganisationallevel(e.g.byretrainingstaff),leadingtorecurringproblems.Staffcontinuetoimplementincorrectpoliciesandproceduresbasedonanincorrectunderstandingoftheirlegalobligations.
IncorrectinformationConsideringtheincorrectinformationcontainedwithinsomelocalauthoritypolicies,parentsofdisabledchildrenaremisinformedastotheirchildren’sstatutoryrights,makingthemlesslikelytoapplyfortransportassistanceortochallengelocalauthorityrefusals.
PoorcommunicationSomelocalauthoritiesdealwithparents’correspondenceinapiecemealmanner.Asaresult,parentshavetomakerepeatedrequestsforinformation(e.g.foranamedcontact
![Page 23: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
officerorconfirmationofachild’sentitlement).Somelocalauthoritiesseemresistanttoresolvingissuesatanearlystage,andachild’sentitlementisonlyrecognisedattheeleventhhour,followingprotractedcorrespondenceandmultipleappeals.
IneffectivereviewmechanismsItwouldappearthatsomelocalauthoritieshaveineffectivereviewmechanisms.Despitehavingtwoorthreeopportunitiestoputthingsrightduringatransportappealprocesslocalauthoritiesarefailingtoproperlyconsiderevidenceputforwardbywell-informedparentsinsupportoftheirapplications.
ConcernsCasesreferredtotheLEaPProjecthaveraisedquestionsabouttheimpactoflocalauthoritypoliciesandpracticeonfamilieswhodonothaveaccesstoinformationand/orsupport.Similarly,thereareconcernsastothecapacityofauthoritiestoembedchangeatanorganisationallevel.
![Page 24: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Annex 3
IPESEA findings Anoteofthanks…
AsaresultofdiscussionsconcerningourresearchprojectwithIPSEAitkindlyofferedusthefollowinginformationregardingreferralstheyhavereceivedfromparentsofdisabledchildrenregardinghometoschooltransport.ThisindicatesthatIPSEAhasreceivedsimilarqueriestothatoftheCerebrareferralsteam.WithIPSEA’sagreementwehaveincludedtheinformationtohighlightthecommonlyoccurringproblemsexperiencedbyparentsofdisabledchildreninattemptingtoaccesstheirstatutoryrights.
HometoschooltransportforchildrenwithSENDresearchsubmissionWithover300volunteers,andassistingnearly7000parentsandyoungpeopleannually,IPSEA(IndependentParentalSpecialEducationAdvice)30isrecognisedasoneoftheleadingorganisationsinspecialeducationalneedsanddisability(SEND)law.Establishedasaregisteredcharityin1983,IPSEAprovidesadviceandadvocacytoparentsofchildrenandyoungpeoplewithSEND.
IPSEAisanentirelyindependentorganisationfocussedonenablingeverychildwithspecialeducationalneedsandordisabilitiestoobtainthebesteducationpossible.WepromotetheinterestsofchildrenandyoungpeoplewithSENDbyworkingwiththegovernment,localauthorities(LAs),schoolsandinterestedthirdparties.IPSEAoffersvariousservicesfromtrainingtofreetelephoneadviceandTribunalsupportandrepresentation.ThisinformationhasbeenpreparedwithregardtotheevidencerecordedfrombeneficiariesofIPSEAservicesandwithinputfromIPSEA’sspecialistlegalteam.
Background
Forchildrenofstatutoryschoolage,thereare4groupsofeligiblechildrenwhicharedetailedinSchedule35BEducationAct1996.Inbrief,theyareasfollows:
1.Thosewholivebeyondstatutorywalkingdistance(under2milesforthosechildrenunder8and3milesforthoseovertheageof8)
30 Registered Charity No. 327691 Limited Company No. 2198066 IPSEA
![Page 25: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
2.ThosewhocannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalkbecauseofaSEN,mobilityordisabilityandlivewithinstatutorywalkingdistance
3.Childrenwholiveonwhatisconsideredanunsaferoute(typicallychildrenlivinginruralareas)
4.Childrenwhoseparentsareconsideredtobelowincomefamilies
IPSEA’spolicywork
ForthepurposeofIPSEA’sworkthefirsttwocategoriesaretheonesweareinterestedinandthisisfrequentlydemonstratedinourpolicywork.Transportisoneofthetop5issueswhichparentscontactIPSEAabout.Ouradvisorsaretrainedtoinformparentsconcerningthecorrectlegalpositionwithregardstotransportentitlementandgiveparentsnextstepadviceinordertoenforceentitlement.However,IPSEAencountersomeLAsmorefrequentlythatothersandsomeLAspersistentlygiveparentsincorrectinformationandinturndenyeligiblechildrentheirtransportentitlement.Providingadvicetoparentsofchildrenwithspecialeducationalneedshavewrittento16LAsinthepast18monthsregardingunlawfultransportpracticeandpolicies.
Thefollowing4issuesfrequentlyarise:
1.TheLAconflatestheSENcategoryofeligibilitywiththestatutorywalkingdistancecategoryIn7ofthe16ofpolicieslookedat,theLAstatedwithinthepolicythatchildrenwithSENwouldonlybeentitledtotransportiftheylivedbeyondthestatutorywalkingdistance.Thisisclearlyincorrectasthe4categoriesofeligibilityareseparateandmustnotbeconflated.
2.PolicieswhichrequirechildrenwithSENtobeinreceiptofastatementofSENoranEHCPlantoqualifyfortransportItisacommonmisconceptionthatchildrenwithSENareonlyentitledtotransportprovisioniftheyhaveastatementoraEHCPlan.TheSENframeworkisseparatefromthetransportframeworkandentitlementtotransportisnotdependantonentitlementundertheSENframework.Althoughwefoundevidenceofthisinonly5ifthe16policeslookedat,anecdotally,wefrequentlyencounterparentswhoareinformedofthismisconceptionverballybyLAs.
3.WidespreadconfusionoverthedutytoprovidetransportwhenachildisnotattendingtheirnearestsuitableschoolSchedule35BEA1996containsanexceptiontotransportonlybeingavailabletothechild’snearestsuitableschool.TheexceptionisthattheLAhasnotmadearrangementsforthechildtobecomearegisteredpupilataqualifyingschoolnearertohishome.Inotherwords,iftheLAhasnotsecuredaplaceforachildathisnearestschool,theLA(ifthechildiseligiblefortransport)willbeunderadutytomaketransportarrangementsforthechildtoattendaschoolfurtherawaythanthenearestschool.ForchildrenwhohavethebenefitofastatementofSENoraEHCPlanthereisafurther
![Page 26: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
exception,iftheyareeligiblefortransport,tobeingentitledtotransporttoaschoolfurtherawaythantheirnearestsuitableschool.
ThisisasaresultofDudleyMBCvShurvinton[2012]EWCA346.Thecourtsaidthattherewasaspecificprocesstobefollowedwherethelocalauthoritywasarguingthattherewasanearersuitableschool:(1)ThefirststageisfortheFirsttierTribunal(FTT)todeterminetherelativetransportcostsofthetwoschools,assumingtheauthoritywillhavetoprovidetransporttoboth.(2)IftheFTTdeterminesthatthecostsoftransporttoSchoolBisnotincompatiblewiththeefficientuseofresources,theFTTmustnameSchoolBandonlySchoolB,evenifSchoolAisalsodeemedsuitable.(3)IftheFTTdeterminesthatthecostoftransporttoSchoolBisincompatiblewiththeefficientuseofresourcesthentheFTTmaynameSchoolBaswellasSchoolAintheStatement,ontheconditionthattheparentspaythecostoftransporttoSchoolB.Theaboveanalysismustbeappliedbeforealocalauthoritycanlawfullyrelieveitselfofthedutytoprovidehometoschooltransport.Thisisthemostcommonmisconceptioninthepolicieswelookatandwaspresentin14ofthe16transportpolicycomplaints.
4.Accompaniment
ThecurrentstatutoryguidanceontransportisbeingusedfrequentlytodenychildrenwithSENtransportprovision.Thereisnoreferencetoaccompanimentanywhereinparagraphs2-5ofSchedule35BtotheEA1996.However,paragraphs17&18ofthestatutoryguidancedealwiththisasfollows:Indeterminingwhetherachildcannotreasonablybeexpectedtowalkforthepurposesof‘specialeducationalneeds,adisabilityormobilityproblemseligibility’or‘unsaferouteeligibility’,thelocalauthoritywillneedtoconsiderwhetherthechildcouldreasonablybeexpectedtowalkifaccompaniedand,ifso,whetherthechild’sparentcanreasonablybeexpectedtoaccompanythechild.Whenconsideringwhetherachild’sparentcanreasonablybeexpectedtoaccompanythechildonthejourneytoschoolarangeoffactorsmayneedtobetakenintoaccount,suchastheageofthechildandwhetheronewouldordinarilyexpectachildofthatagetobeaccompanied.18.Thegeneralexpectationisthatachildwillbeaccompaniedbyaparentwherenecessary,unlessthereisagoodreasonwhyitisnotreasonabletoexpecttheparenttodoso.
WefrequentlyencounterLAswhowronglyproceedonthebasisthatachildmustbeaccompaniedunlesstheparentcanproveotherwiseandinformparentsthatitistheirlegaldutytoaccompanyachildtoschool,usingthestatutoryguidancetojustifythisposition.Thisimposesahigherthresholdthanwhatiscontainedinlaw.StatutoryguidancecannotimposeastrictertestthanwhatiscontainedinlawandyetparentstellusthatthisiswhattheyaretoldbyLAs.
![Page 27: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Annex 4
Summary Local Government Ombudsman (2017) Report31
A report from the Local Government Ombudsman
AlthoughissueswithSchoolTransportarefarfromanewphenomenon,2017sawincreasedattentionregardingLocalAuthorityhometoschooltransport32includingaContact-a-Family(CaF)schooltransportinquiry.33AswiththeCerebraLEaPhelpline,schoolTransporthasalsobeenoneofthemostcommontopicsencounteredbytheCaFhelpline
InMarch2017,theLocalGovernmentOmbundsman(or‘LGO’)publishedafocusreport’called‘Allonboard?Navigatingschooltransportissues:learninglessonsfromcomplaints’.34Inthisreporttheextentofschooltransportissuewasreflectedintheriseofcomplaintsfrom160receivedin2014/2015to261in2015/2016.ThepurposeofthereportwastohighlighttoCouncilsthecommonlyoccurringcomplaintsreceivedtohelpaddressthesereoccurringfailures.
Themostcommonthemeswithinthesecomplaintsincludedinadequatecommunicationwithparentsandfailuretoconsultparentsregardingpolicychanges.Mostnotablythough,complaintswerealsoreceivedregardingthelackofclearinformationavailabletoparentsandthefailureofLA’s‘toconsiderhealthandsafetyproblemsassociatedwiththeireducationalneedsanddisabilitywhenconsideringeligibilityfortransport’.
Thereporthelpfullydetailedthelegislationthatprescribeswhatgroupsofchildrenare‘eligible’forschooltransport.WithinthecategoryregardingSEN,mobilityanddisabilityproblems,thereportincludesthefactthatadisabilitymaybeatemporarymedicalcondition.ThereportalsoreferredtotheStatutoryGuidancethatLA’shaveadutytohaveregardto.Inparticular,theLGOcitedLA’sobligationtohavearobustappealsprocedure,whichshouldbepublishedalongsidethetransportpolicies.OurresearchhasshownthatnotallLAhaveabidedbythisdutyandarefailingtoprovideanadequateappealsprocedureforparentcarerswhoarenotsatisfiedwithLAtransportdecisions.
31 Local government ombudsman All on board? Navigating school transport issues (LGO 2017). 32 See for example Burns, J School transport cuts causing 'distress and upheaval (BBC 17 March 2017) and ‘'I can't afford disabled son's school taxi' (BBC 17 March 2017). 33 Contact-A-Family School transport inquiry (2017). 34 Local government ombudsman All on board? Navigating school transport issues (LGO 2017).
![Page 28: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
AlistofexpectationsofCouncilsweredetailedinthereportwhichincludedtheduty‘toprovideclearandaccurateinformationaboutschooltransportpoliciesandchangestothosepolicies’.ThisexpectationcoincideswiththeconcernsofthisresearchwhichhashighlightedtheinaccuracyandinaccessibilityofasubstantialproportionofLA’sonlinetransportpolicies.
OtherissuesemphasisedthroughoutthereportincludedLAfailuretoapplytransportguidancetobothapplicationsandappeals.TherearesectionsdedicatedtothosewithSEN,mobilityanddisabilityproblemswhichemphasisedthatsuchchildrenshouldnotbetreatedlessfavourably.ForchildrenwithadisabilityormobilityproblemtheLGOdetailedtheappropriatetestforeligibility,whichstated:
Eventhoughsomechildrenwithmobilityproblems,specialeducationalneedsoradisabilitylivewithinthestatutorywalkingdistance,thelawandstatutoryguidancesetsoutthreetestswhichcanmakethechild‘eligible’forfreeschooltransport:
‘1.Councilsmustconsiderifthechildhasmobilityorhealthandsafetyproblemsassociatedwiththeirspecialeducationalneedsordisability,whichmeansitisnotreasonableforthecounciltoexpectthechildtowalktoschool.Councilsshouldassesstheeligibilityforsuchchildrenonanindividualbasistoidentifytheirparticulartransportrequirements;
2.Ifso,councilsmustconsiderwhetheritisreasonabletoexpectthechildtowalktoschoolifaccompanied.Forexample,cananadultpreventthehealthandsafetyrisksposedbythechild’sspecialeducationalneedsanddisability?
3.Ifso,councilsmustconsiderifitisreasonabletoexpecttheadulttoaccompanythechildonthejourney,takingintoaccountarangeoffactorsincludingthechild’sageandwhetheronewouldnormallyexpectachildofthatagetobeaccompanied.’
ItwasalsostressedthatLA’sshould‘nothavepoliciesthatautomaticallyprecludethosefamilieswhoreceivethehigherrateofthemobilitycomponentofDisabilityLivingAllowance.TheDepartmentforEducationhassaidinParliamentthatbeinginreceiptofthisallowancedoesnotnecessarilyconfereligibilityforfreeschooltransportbutneitherdoesitprecludeitifthechildisaneligiblechild.’
TheLGO’sreportappearstohavecitedsomeofthekeyconcernsthisresearchprojecthasfound.However,theextentoftheissuesatbothpolicyandpracticelevelarenotnecessarilyfullyexploredinthisreport.Problemswithaccessibilityandaccuracyofpolicieswerenotfullyexplored.Nevertheless,thisreportisapositivesteptowardsaddressingthewidespreadinconsistenciesandinadequatepoliciesandpracticesofasubstantialproportionofLocalAuthorities.
![Page 29: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Annex5
Studentreflections
Lisa‘FindingtheinformationoncertainwebsiteswasreallydifficultandsoIassumeaparentwithadisabledchildwouldfinditevenhardertofindallthenecessaryinformationneeded.Thepolicypagesonsomewebsitesweretoolongandtime-consumingtobeabletoreadthrougheverythingandunderstandwhatappliestotheirchild.Thiswouldprobablybeverystressfulfortheparenttryingtofindoutwhethertheirchildappliesforfreeschooltransport.Additionally,someofthelanguageusedinthepolicieswerequitehardtounderstandandthelegallanguageinvolvedseemstocloudrequirementsofeligibility.OverallIthinkthewebsiteswiththepoliciesneedtohaveaclearerviewoftheirinformation.’
Amy‘TheinformationthatIhavefoundwhenresearchingthecouncilwebsiteshasbeenvaried.Somewebsiteshavebeenveryeasytolocatethepolicywithjustthreeorfourclicks,whereasothercouncilwebsiteshavebeenmoredifficulttofindthepolicy,ornotlocatablewhatsoever.Obviouslythisisfromalawstudent’sperspective,thereforeifitwerefromaparent’sperspectiveitmaybeevenhardertotryandlocatethepolicy.Somepolicieshavebeenwritteninsimpleunderstandablelanguage,howeverotherpoliciesseemtoappearquiteconfusingandnotexplainingtherequirementsofwhatisneededtoobtainfreeschooltransport.
Forexample,IwasunabletofindapolicyforZCouncil’sandthewebsitewasveryunclearasitwasjustdirectingfromwebpagetowebpage,concludinginnorealinformativerequirements.However,ontheotherhand,XCountyCouncil’spolicywasveryeasytofind,itonlytookminimalclicksandthepolicywasnottoolongandwaswrittenverywellforsomeone,evenwithoutlegalknowledge,tounderstand.Overall,Iwouldconcludethatthepoliciesfromthecouncil’swebsitesarerelativelyeasytolocate,andmosttheinformationisquiteeasytounderstand.However,thisisfromalawstudentsperspective,Ifeelitwouldbedifferentfromaparentsperspective,theymightnotknowhowtoresearchthewebsiteproperly,orhavethetimeandthepatiencetodoso.’
Fiona‘ThroughoutconductingmyresearchfromthevariouswebsitesIfacedmanyissues.OnthemajorityofthewebsitesthatIlookedat,theinformationwasdifficulttolocate,whichforfamiliesthatneedthesupportmustfindextremelyfrustrating.Onawhole,oncetherequiredinformationwaslocated,Ifoundthatthesiteswereaccommodatingintermsoftheirexplanations(i.e.notoverlyusinglegaljargon).However,notalloftheinformationgivenbytheauthoritieswasentirelycorrect,theytendedtoinclude‘may’and‘if’alotratherthanexplicitlystatingthingswhichmakespredictingtheoutcomeverydifficult.
![Page 30: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Furthermore,oftentheapplicationformsweretailoredtowardsthoseapplyingfromlowincomefamilies,withlittleornomentionofthoseapplyingwithadisability.Allthesitesdidincludecontactdetailsforenquiriesandhowonewouldappealiftheyneededtodoso.
OverallIhavefoundtheresearchusefulinseeinghowauthoritieshandlethepublicationofsuchrights.FromaperspectiveofalawstudentconductingresearchIfoundthatalloftheinformationwasthereifyouknewwheretolook,howeverIunderstand(fromaparent’sperspective)howtheprocessmaybeoffputtingasitwouldbetimeconsumingandanaddedstressonthefamily.Themajorityofthesitesprovidedtoomuchinformation,whichmakestherelevantinformationforparentshardtofind,thustheywouldallbenefitfrombeingmoreconcise.’
Nav‘Whiletheinformationregardingschooltransportwaseasytofindoneachwebsiteandwasinclear,easytounderstandlanguage,thelackofinformationoncertainwebsitestoentitlementoffreetransportandescortswasmildlydisappointing.While,ALAandBLAhadclearwebsiteswhichprovidedsufficientinformation,CLAandtheDLAwerecertainlymoredifficulttonavigatethrough.D’swebsitedoesnotevenallowaccesstothewebsiteuntilanaccountismadewhichmaybediscouragingforparents.Thelackofinformationanddiscrepanciesbetweeneachsitemayprohibitparentsfromclaimingsupportwherethey'reentitledandissomethingthatmostdefinitelyrequiresattentionfromParliament.’Amie‘Myresearchconcludedthatthecurrentinformationavailableforthoseseekingadditionalsupportforthetransportoftheirdisabledchildtoschoolisunsatisfactory.AfterlookingintothepoliciesofvariousCountycouncilsitisclearthatgreaterandclearerinformationmustbeprovidedtothosewhoneedit.AlthoughitisnotdifficulttofindthepoliciesontheCountycouncilwebsites,thepoliciesthemselvesareoftenverydetailedandoverlycomplex.Thepoliciesoftenincludedinformationonallthe‘eligible’groupshowevertherewasoftenalackofinformationaboutthosewithSENandstatements.Allthewebsitesprovideddetailsonhowtoapplyandappealbutonceagainthelanguagewasconfusingandtheprocesseselaboratewhichmayconfusethereaderorpossiblyconvincethemtonotbotherapplyingforthesupport’.Aiste‘Eachofthecouncilwebsitesresearchedmadetheirschooltransportationpolicyeasilyaccessibleand,amidoccasionallegaljargon,writtenineasy-to-understandlanguage.However,fromtheperspectiveofanSENapplicant,thematerialwasunhelpful.Theapplicationprocesswasrarelyreadilyavailableandoften,especiallyforSENapplicants,onlymentionedinvaguetermsleavingpotentialapplicantsconfusedastohowtheycouldactuallygoaboutclaimingtheirrights.Somecouncils’alludedtoanadditionalexaminationprocessspecificallyforSENapplicantswithoutgoingintodetail.Thisextendstotheappealprocessaswell.Whileeverypolicymadementionofitsexistence,theactualprocesstobegintheappealwasoftenmadeouttobetediousandinefficient(suchasrequiringthosewantingtoappealtowritebypost).Thereisnoreasonwhyeverycouncilcannotprovidealinktoanonlineapplicationandanonlineappealthatcanbesubmittedinstantlyinadditiontoaphonenumberofthecouncildepartmentallocatedtoschooltransportissues.This
![Page 31: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
informationshouldbeattheverybeginningofeachcouncil’swebpageandnotinthemiddleorendofaseparate,long-windedPDF.’
Rachael‘ThroughoutthistaskIhaveencounteredanumberofdifficultiesinfindingthenecessaryinformation.Ididnotseeasinglelocalauthoritysitethathadalltheinformationclearlyandeasilyavailable.Mostwebsiteswererelativelyeasytofindsomeformofpolicy,onlyrequiringthreeorfourclicks.Howeverwhenreachingwhatshouldhavebeentherelevantpagetherewerelongandcomplexpolicieswritteninchallengingtounderstandlegalterminology.SomewebsitesIcouldnotevenfindtheapplicationform.AsaparenttryingtofindthisinformationIwouldhavecertainlystruggledtomeettheneedsofmychild.’
Victoria&Winona‘Findingthepolicydocumentsthemselveswassimpleenoughinmostcasesasitwaslocatedundertheschoolsections.However,therewereinstanceswheneitherthepolicyeitherdidn'texistorwasunavailableatthetime.Thisisnotfairfortheparent,astheinformationshouldbereadilyprovided.Thepolicydocumentsthemselveswereverydauntingintermsoftheirformattingandthelanguage.Theywereoftenlongpdfs,withblackandwhitewritingandminimalheadings,insteadjustnumberingtheparagraphs.Forparentsthismakesthepoliciesuninviting,particularlywhenthereisnocontentspagesoallthedocumentmustberead.
Therewasaheavyfocusonlegislation,sectionsandlegaldefinitionsinmanyofthepolicies.Foraparentthatdoesnothavealegalbackground,thismakesthepolicyunnecessarilydifficulttounderstand.Insteadthereshouldbeplainlanguageusedsothattheycanunderstandwhatthechildisentitledto.Theinformationthatwasprovidedwasoftencomplicated,andsometimesinaccurate,meaningthatparentsarefacedwithunnecessaryhurdleswhentryingtoapplyforsomethingthattheirchildisentitledto,sothattheycanbenefit.Inmostinstances,theinformationonescorts,applicationsandcomplaintswasdetailedenoughthataparentcouldunderstand.Typicallycontactdetailswereprovidedgivingtheparenttheopportunitytogetfurtherinformation.’
Muhammad‘Inmyfirstterminthelawschool,IhavedecidedtojointheSchoolTransportResearchTeamandIhavenothingtoregretthatdecision,apartfromtheresultsIhavefound.Theteamhasonesimpleobjective,tocheckwhetherthelocalauthoritieshaveoutlinedtherightinformationvis-à-visschooltransportaidtotheirwebsites.Assimpleasitmaysound,thesurveycouldn’tbecompletedwithinashortperiodoftime.Somelocalauthoritiesprovidedabundleofdocumentsupto46pageslong,inblackandwhitefilledwithconfusinglegalterms,eventoalawstudent.Hence,ittooktimetoperusethedocuments.Somelocalauthoritiesprovidedinformationcorrectlyintheirpdfdocumentsenclosedontheweb,butmostofthemhadmisleadinginformation.
![Page 32: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Luckyforme,duetomylegalknowledge,IcouldidentifywhichpartoftheinformationwasinaccordancewiththeEducationAct1996Schedule35Paragraph2andwhichoneisnot.Thecontradictorynatureoftheinformationonthewebandinthepdfdocumentsmustsurelyconfusetheparentswhodonothavelegalbackground,andthismightdiscouragethemfromrequestingassistance.Whatisthepurposetohaveadocumentthatisunreadableandincomprehensible?Yes,theparentsdohavearesponsibilitytounderstandtheActandtryattheirbesttodigesttheinformationprovided,butasimpler,moreinteractiveandengagingdocumentwouldbemuchbetter.Ihopethisresearchwillensurethatlocalauthoritiesrevisetheirexistinginformationandperhapsbemoresensitive.Ilookforwardtoseeingappropriateactiontakenbytheselocalauthorities.’
Harry‘BeingpartoftheDisabilityLawResearchProjecthasbeenoneofthemostfulfillingexperiencesofmylifebothasayoungresearcherandadvocateindisabilityrights.Theexperiencehasenergizedmypassionfordisabilityrightsadvocacyandresearch,andmytechnicalunderstandingaswellaspracticeondisabilitypolicyhasgenerallygrowntoanadvancedlevelfollowingmyinvolvementintheproject.
Thisexperiencecameupwithitsownchallengesbutthroughpersonalmotivation,teamworkandtimelysupportfromthesupervisors:SorchaandLuke,Iwasabletogothroughthechallengeswithmucheaseandcomposure.OneofthechallengesthatIcansingleoutishavinghadtoreadsomepolicieswithover55pagesandwritteninverytechnicalterms.Butthiswasworthit,consideringthatpartoftheresearchwastolookattheavailabilityofinformationandeaseofthepoliciesonschooltransportfordisabledchildrenintheUK.BeingaLawstudentmyself,andyethavingfacedsuchchallengesasthelengthandlanguageofsomeofthepolicies,Iwaschallengedtoviewmyselffromtheperspectiveofmanyparentsorguardiansofdisabledchildrenwhomight(orindeeddo)facechallengesinaccessingthemuchneededinformationonthecouncilwebsitesorinpolicydocuments.
Allinall,thishasbeenagreatexperienceandIhaveadvancedmyskillsinteamwork,timemanagementandtechnicalunderstandingofdisabilityrightspolicyandresearch.IwouldpersonallyencouragemorestudentsattheUniversityofLawtovolunteerincausesliketheDisabilityLawResearchProject.’
Panagiota‘Inthepastmonths,IhaveworkedtogetherwithotherstudentsoftheUniversityofLeedsfortheSchoolTransportProject.Wewereseparatedintoteamsandeachofusassignedspecificlocalauthoritieswebsites.Iwasexcitedtoparticipateinthisproject.Somewebsiteswerenotverywellorganisedandsometimesitwashardformetofindthepoliciesorthepolicieswereconfusinghavingunnecessaryormisleadinginformation.
IwasluckytocooperatewithLuke,Sorcha,HarryandMohamed.LukeandSorchaweregreatcompanionswhoenlightenedourmindsanddirectustotherightway.InmygroupwewerethreepeoplewhowerelivingindifferentareassowedecidedthatitwouldbebettertocompletethesurveyseachofusindependentlyandthencombinedalltheresultstogetherintoanewDataForm.Iwentthroughdifficultiesinfindingtheanswersforthesurveysasthemajorityofthelocalauthorities’websiteswerenotveryorganisedorthe
![Page 33: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
policieswereverylongandconfusing,maybenotcoveringallthebasiclawrequirements.Itriedtobemoreconcentrated,usemyanalyticalskillsandpaymoreattentiontothedetailsatthesametime.IwasquiteorganisedandIhadstudiedthenecessaryinformationgivenbyLukeandSorchaandfollowedthegiveninstructions.ThatishowImanagedtomeetmydutyandfinishedthesurveysontime.
Theprojectcontainsseveraltasks-readingtherelevantlaw,readinglocalauthoritiespolicies,navigatinginwebsites,collectingtheappropriatedatafromthepolicies,fillingtheminthesurveysandtransferringdatatothefinalDataForm.SomeofthesetaskswerechallengingandotherswerequiteeasyformeasIwasfamiliarwiththiskindofjobbefore.ThemostchallengingtaskwasthepolicyreadingwhenIhadtoselectanddefinetherightinformationinordertoanswerthequestionsinthesurveys.
![Page 34: Local Authority Home to School On-line Transport Policies ......Annex 3: Summary of IPESEA findings PAGE 24 Annex 4: Summary of Local Government Ombudsman Report PAGE 27 Annex 5: Student](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060722/60820b251f3c75678a516a5e/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Annex 6
Jargon Buster
‘Walkingdistance’ 2milesifunder8-tonearestqualifyingschool3milesifover8-tonearestqualifyingschool
‘LA’
ShorthandforLocalAuthority-thegovernmentalbodywitheducationalfunctionsandduties.Previouslyreferredtoas‘LEA’orlocaleducationauthorities.
‘SEN’ SpecialEducationalNeeds
‘StatementofSEN’ GiventoachildwhorequiresadditionalsupportfortheirSENoverandabovewhatcanbeprovidedbytheSchool(longanddetailedprocess)
‘EHCP’ ‘Education,Health&CarePlan’thatisthenewstatementofSENsince2014.Combinesthechildsneedsineducation,healthandcareinonedocument.
‘Compulsoryschoolage’ Isbetween5and16yearsold.
‘Qualifyingschool’ Thenearestsuitableeducationalestablishment(whichmaybenamedbytheLAonanEHCP)
‘LEaP’ Means-LegalEntitlementsandProblem-SolvingProject
‘IPSEA’ AcronymforIndependentParentalSpecialEducationAdvice.AcharitableindependentbodythatassistsparentsingettingtherighteducationfortheirchildrenwithSEN.