David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 118: To ask the Minister for Education and Science the budget and expenditure of the Special Education Appeals Board each year since it became operational in April 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37115/09]

John Moloney (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Special Education Appeals Board (SEAB) was established under the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs (EPSEN) Act 2004 to hear and determine appeals under the Act.

SEAB comprises a Chairperson, Ms Fionnuala Kilfeather, and two ordinary members, Mr Páid McGee and Mr Patrick O'Keeffe, all of whom have a special interest in, or knowledge of, education and in particular the education of persons with special educational needs. Appointments were made to this inaugural board in April 2007 for an initial three year term.

SEAB will be independent in the performance of its functions. None of the sections in EPSEN which would allow an appeal to be lodged have been commenced as yet.

However, since its establishment, the Board has developed draft procedures which it proposes to use to consider appeals once the relevant sections of the EPSEN Act are commenced. In considering the requirements of the appeals process which will be required under EPSEN, the Board members have examined the range of legal issues associated with such a process. The Board members have also reviewed the outcome of judicial reviews of education decisions and looked at the structures and procedures in other Tribunal fora such as the Equality Tribunal and the Employment Equality Tribunal.

The Board has also held ongoing meetings with individuals and organisations whose experience would inform the work of the Board or whose work was linked with the work of the Board including my own Department, the National Council for Special Education and the National Educational Welfare Board. The Board has also considered the requirements for mediation as provided for under EPSEN.

SEAB does not have a separate budget. My Department spent €9,691 in 2007 and €184,243 in 2008 on funding the operation of the SEAB. In the current year, a provision of €100,000 was set aside to fund its operations. €54,145 has been spent to end of September 2009.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 119: To ask the Minister for Education and Science further to Parliamentary Question No. 1220 of 6 October 2009, his plans to establish an independent appeals process which can be used by parents to appeal the decisions of special educational needs organisers when they are not in a position to provide additional information; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37116/09]

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have previously advised the Deputy that the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) has its own appeal mechanism. I understand that the NCSE is currently finalising a new set of procedures for appeal of SENO decisions in relation to the allocation of teaching/SNA resources. Under the proposed procedures appeals may be lodged by schools or parents. The appeal will need to set out the grounds for the appeal. The key grounds for appeal will be that the SENO (i) Misinterpreted or ignored my Department's policy or (ii) Failed to take due account of the evidence of the child's educational and/or care needs or the resourcing available within the school when applying my Department's policy.

Where appeals are lodged the decision will be examined by a Senior SENO who was not involved in the previous decision and a finding communicated to the school or parent. It is expected that the new procedures will be fully operational by the end of the year.

I am also informed that, in 2010, the NCSE intends establishing an independent Appeal Advisory Committee, comprising an independent chair, a parents' representative and a school management representative. This will consider cases where schools consider that the appeals process was inadequate/inappropriate in addressing the concerns raised or represents an irrational interpretation of the facts and application of the policy criteria.