The Story of the Survey that just *disappeared*.

Otherwise known as: What happens when data refuses to play along.

For years, Surrey County Council has worked hard to shape its image.

Just last week, in his address to Full Council at Surrey’s Annual General Meeting, Council Leader Cllr. Tim Oliver OBE stood before the chamber and proudly declared:

“We care. We take responsibility. We work hard. And we deliver.”

It was a speech packed full of confident claims – not least about the Council’s approach to Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND):

“The vast majority of these children and their families are in high-quality education and happy with their support.”

In fact, this address was full of exactly the kind of overblown rhetoric one pulls out when perception matters much more than fact. When you are peddling hard to keep the narrative afloat – even as the cracks spread beneath your feet.

And perhaps this quest to tightly control the ‘narrative’ at any cost is understandable — because, after-all, this isn’t just any local authority.

• Cllr. Tim Oliver is not only Surrey County Council’s Leader — he is also Chair of the County Councils Network, representing England’s largest authorities at the highest levels.
• And Rachael Wardell, Surrey’s Executive Director for Children’s Services, has recently become the President of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) — the national voice of children’s services leadership.
• And, lest we forget, Joanne Killian, Surrey County Council’s departed CEO who now heads up the Local Government Association – representing the views of Local Authorities from right across the country, and was soon joined by other all too familiar non-exec players, like Surrey’s former Communications Guru who hopped right along with her.

This is a leadership team with the very definition of a national platform.

National reach. National influence… and crucially, National responsibility.
Their words carry weight. Their performance sets precedent. Their conduct sets the standard.

So when something doesn’t add up in Surrey — the echoes ripple far beyond its borders.

The Cracks beneath the surface.

Over the last nine months, we at Measure What Matters have been interrogating Surrey County Council’s performance — with a particular focus on governance, scrutiny, and decision-making.

Our approach? Using verifiable data and public records to test three things: how accurately performance is being reported, how well issues are being managed, and whether the rhetoric holds up to scrutiny. Our primary focus has been on their management of Education and Special Educational Needs – because from the outset, the data pointed to a Local Authority in complete free-fall.

We’ve read the reports, watched the meetings, compared the numbers. We’ve traced what’s been said, when, and by whom.

And something just doesn’t stack up.

Because for all the external claims — the glowing leadership rhetoric, the media statements, the closed-door briefings to the Department for Education, Ofsted, and Surrey’s own councillors — the numbers… and more importantly the lived experience of families, continue to tell an uncomfortably different story.

Those who’ve followed our work will know that our early documentation analysis quickly uncovered a striking fact:

Surrey has had the highest number of escalated complaints to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for more than two years – staggeringly, trending at nearly 10 times the national average.

But how did they respond to such a catastrophic collapse in service confidence?

…By quietly dropping that data from their internal and public reports for over 14 months — effectively masking their performance, and persistently misleading both councillors and MPs. Even when directly questioned.

But that’s not all.

Despite repeated public claims that things are improving, Surrey has also quietly pushed a rapidly escalating number of families into complex legal appeals — purportedly many on irrational or procedurally flawed grounds.

They’ve now racked up more legal appeals than any other local authority for the last three years of published data. And in the last year, 2024, that number tipped into four figures for the first time anywhere.

Ever.

Over 1,000 registered legal appeals against their decision-making, in just 12 months. With updated figures for 2024 due for publication imminently, rest assured we will be reporting further on this shortly.

Source: Tribunals statistics quarterly: July to September 2024 – GOV.UK

But perhaps the most concerning feature of this particular authority isn’t just its staggeringly poor performance compared to others — it’s the fact that this continues to be so successfully misrepresented.

We’ve talked before about the Emperor’s New Clothes effect. But this? This is next level. The distortion between what is evident… and what is claimed, is astonishing.

And if you are spotting a pattern – you are not alone.

Catastrophic underperformance? Tick

Persistent, public denial? Tick.

Disappearing Data? Tick

Silencing dissenting views and difficult questions? Tick Tick Tick

Our view? No matter the desperate protestations of the Leader – This is a Local Authority with a very serious transparency problem.

… And nowhere is that more obvious than in the story of the survey they didn’t want you to see.

September 2024: A Meeting, A Question. An Answer.

Lets rewind to a Children Families and Lifelong Learning (CFLL) Select Committee meeting in September 2024.

The tone in the room was shifting. Public scrutiny was increasing. Newly emerged reports showing local, systemic outlier underperformance were now jarring with the longstanding official narratives. MPs were asking questions. Even the media was sniffing. And the Council’s “End to End Review” of Statutory SEND Services — launched in early 2023 as a core component of their various flagship SEND Transformation and Recovery initiatives — was now 18 months in, with millions already invested and a ballooning executive team overseeing its rollout.

For further information about the initiatives under discussion refer to: CFLLC Select Committee EHCP Recovery Plan and End to End Review Report – September 2024.pdf

Council Officers had spent the morning in full flow “project speak” – talk of “optimisation”, “roadmaps”, “integration” – and perhaps the most baffling of all: the “unification of SEND front doors”.

Having heard enough, a simple question was asked:

Councillor A:

“Are you hearing that people feel that this process that’s been going on since May 2023 has actually delivered progress? Is that what you are hearing, that people are more confident now, on the whole?”

Officer B; Senior Officer responsible for the delivery of the program nodded;

“Yes… there is recognition that we are moving in positive directions and that the changes we’ve embedded are having a positive impact so far”.

(So far reassuring.)

Councillor A:

“Thankyou. Just quickly, where possible… is that feedback available for us to see?”

A pause. Silence. Quizzical looks.

The Assistant Director steps in.

“I think what ‘B’ was doing was describing a number of different sources of information. So… I’m not sure it’s currently in a form that’s, (er) easy to share…”

(You could hear the room shift.)

She continued:

“…but certainly we could look at doing that. And I think the results of the Annual Parent Carer Survey, which will be going out this term, would be really useful to share with Select Committee — because that’s looking at a large and representative number of parents’ views. So. That would be really important information to share.”

“If you could do that, that would be great,” the councillor replied.
“Oh — and the “other” feedback as well.”

Action recorded. Tick.

And since?

Silence.

‘The Parent Voice’: Missing in action.

Back in Autumn 2024, over 1,000 parents and carers across Surrey took part in the Council’s official Parent Carer Experience Survey — known internally as “Parents’ Voice Matters”

This wasn’t a token exercise. It’s actually an established annual survey and a key performance measure embedded in Surrey’s Additional Needs and Disabilities (AND) Strategy reporting, specifically under Priority A: improving the experience of children, young people and families.

In fact, it’s one of the only reliable mechanisms Surrey claims to use to measure trust, communication, and the quality of support — information which, by the way, it is also required to report to both the Department for Education (DfE) and Ofsted as part of its intervention oversight.

Both agencies have already acknowledged that relational practice, communication, and trust are significant areas of concern.

Put simply: If you want to know whether so-called improvements are having an impact on children and families… this is the dataset.

At the time the survey was being conducted, scrutiny pressure was already mounting. MPs were raising concerns. Data was showing signs of decline, not progress. And the “improvement narrative” being pushed by leadership was, at best, threadbare.

Yet despite all that, this survey — Surrey’s own measure of progress — has still not been published.

Even though:

• The survey was completed by over 1,000 families, giving it significant statistical weight;
• The CFLL Select Committee specifically logged an action requesting that the results be brought forward;
• Officers had publicly described the survey as “important feedback” and committed to sharing it;
• The AND Strategy itself names this survey as a core accountability measure for Priority A.

According to internal documents we’ve seen, the results were scheduled for publication in February 2025. Yet here we are — now six months since the survey closed — and still, nothing.

Even more troubling?

The two relevant Select Committee actions from the September 2024 Session were both marked complete, citing only an unspecified internal email. But no report has been published. No results have been publicly shared.

And NO other explanation has been given.

Extract from the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning Select Committee; Actions and Recommendations Tracker; December 2024; ; Action CFLLC 20/24

Source: 2. Actions and Rec Tracker December 2024 ver 1.0.pdf

Let’s be clear: This is not ‘just’ a missed deadline. It’s a deafening silence.

The “Parent Voice” — Surrey’s flagship measure of lived experience — is, quite literally, missing in action.

OFSTED? Have you seen it? DfE? What about you?

What might it say?

Well. We don’t know — officially.

But here’s what we do know:

We know the data exists, with a sample size of >1,000+ families – statistically robust for a SEND cohort of this size by any standard. We are told, the analysis is also complete. And it’s our understanding that the results have, to all intents and purposes, already been up and down the various corridors of power, subject to some form of internal embargo, and with specific instructions to limit circulation.

We know that the essence of this particular survey focuses predominantly on the relational matters – things that often matter most to families

• Being listened to and understood?
• Treated with professionalism and respect?
• Trust and Confidence?
• Communication?

This kind of data doesn’t speak to systems, processes or spreadsheets. No “unified SEND front doors” here. 😉

It speaks to culture. And that’s what makes it so important.

Because research shows that most users of any service will tolerate delay, complexity — even perceived bureaucracy — if they trust the people they’re dealing with. If they feel respected. If they believe the system is on their side.

Which raises the only question that really matters: What could be so damning that it justifies burying Surrey’s flagship measure of trust?

That’s a question Surrey County Council will need to answer.
And soon.

Because it’s hard to avoid the obvious follow-up: If this survey showed growing trust, rising confidence, and improving relationships — would we still be waiting to see it?

Furthermore – on 14 May 2025, in his inaugural address following re-election as Leader of Surrey County Council, Cllr Tim Oliver launched a tirade directed at those who have expressed concerns about this Directorate:

“Let me be clear… there is a lot of misinformation, and at times wilful misunderstanding, around this important issue.
The vast majority of those children and their families are in high-quality education and happy with their support.”

Source: Agenda for Council on Tuesday, 20 May 2025, 10.00 am – Surrey County Council; Leader’s Statement.

Well Cllr. Oliver OBE! That’s a bold claim to make — especially when the one most crucial and relevant dataset that could prove it (or not) would seem to be still sitting, metaphorically, in your locked drawer.

But worst still? This simply isn’t just about Surrey anymore.

The National Stage: When Local Failings Shape National Reform

Arguably, it would seem there has never been a more critical juncture for Special Educational Needs (SEND) provision in England.

SEND reform isn’t just being discussed — to our eyes, it’s now actually being wielded. As justification. As narrative. In some cases, even as a weapon.

And nowhere is that more evident than in Surrey, where senior leadership have already begun regularly making increasingly loaded statements about how things will be different — and… what is to come.

At the centre of this?

Rachael Wardell, Surrey’s Executive Director for Children’s Services — and now, also, the President of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS).

It’s a very powerful role. Perhaps never more so, given the National Context. One that sets the tone for children’s services leadership right across the country. One that literally places her at the coal-face of shaping national SEND policy.

And since taking up the presidency, Wardell has made no secret of her views – on reform, on Tribunals, on parents, on what she thinks children *really* need need, on what “good” looks like, and on how *she believes* local authority relationships “should” work.

And just last month, she wrote to all school leaders in Surrey to reassure them that, while SEND is a national challenge:

“…locally we are continuing to make significant progress in delivering an improved service to ensure in Surrey no child is left behind”.

Director – Children, Families and Lifelong Learning | Surrey Education Services

🙃 Errr. Hm. We’ll maybe just leave that one there shall we? From the feedback we’ve received, school leaders are feeling just about as ‘reassured’ about progress as parents and carers are.

Instead, let’s consider — just rhetorically, of course…

What might it say about state of national leadership when the President of the ADCS – literally poised to take a driving seat of SEND Reform- is overseeing a Children’s Service that (hypothetically speaking…) may be trusted by fewer than 🤐% parents to act in the best interests of their child?

Depending, of course, on the figure… well that would seem to be quite the mandate, hey?

What would that mean for:

• Public accountability?
• Professional ethics?
• The credibility of reform?

And to be clear — we’re speaking hypothetically. Because before we draw any meaningful conclusions we would need to see the data. In full. But if that’s what the data shows? Then covering it with a metaphorical dust sheet and wheeling it into a back room isn’t just a matter of poor judgement.

It’s a serious matter of public trust. And one that, in our opinion, must be investigated. And answered for.

So what now?

Surrey still has a chance to do the right thing here.

A new Lead Member is finally in post.
Bold words are now flying — about openness, listening, constructive working, change.

But with this track record? Unfortunately words alone are not enough.

If this Council is serious about credibility, integrity and transparency — if it truly wants to rebuild trust with families, MPs, professionals and its own scrutiny committees — then there is one simple, unavoidable step:

Publish the Survey.
In full. Every question.

No edits. No filters. Just facts.

No more deflection.
No more spin.
No more managing the optics.

Just data. Evidence. And honesty.

Because if the results really showed progress? We all know they’d already be front and centre in every Surrey press release.

So if they don’t?

Then keeping them shelved indefinitely, while still claiming improvement tells us everything we need to know.

Surrey County Council — we’re all watching. And at this point, the question is no longer if you’ll publish.

It’s why you’re still choosing not to ⏰

Measure what Matters.