My son is on action plan - there's no cause for concern is there?(23 Posts)
My ds is sept born, he is on the gifted and talented list for reading and mathematics (he reads fluently and his maths shocks me frequently). However he has always been v reluctant to use a pen, he started school undecided which hand he would use to write with and although he has now settled on the right, he will still use the left for eating and drawing occasionally.
His school is great, he is in a workshop for gross motor skills and also in a small daily group for fine motor skills, both of which he enjoys.
For this reason he has been put on school action, does this just formalise the support he is already receiving? I only wonder as his senco seemed a bit hesitant and sought my permission to put him on it.
I would say its sounds entirely reasonable. He is getting extra support, they have formalised it. It is the lowest rung of the ladder if you like and they always have to seek permission! They may have been concerned that you would refuse the plan as he is g and t in areas as some people refuse due to stigma/ignorance which denies the child the help they need. Sounds like sensible appropriate steps to me. Hth x
Schools receive more funding the more kids on IEP's they have.
You should say 'yes' to him having one though. Later on down the line, if he does need more support, and he hasn't had an official IEP, you'll be screwed.
So don't worry about it. School sought permission because you can't just whack a child on one without the parents being informed. Easier if parents on are board.
Thanks for the quick responses, I love mumsnet!!
He is 5, I don't have any issue with him being on it and at least now I understand why they asked my permission.
I'm glad it means more funding available because they are fantastic at spotting any "chinks" in a child's development and addressing them.
Thanks again, feeling reassured
School does not receive funding per child on the SEN register / child with an IEP.
Sounds good to me - I wish DS's school had done something like this for him. He was G&T in maths & literacy, but had problems with fine motor skills including really bad handwriting, for which he got no help whatsoever - his Sats were transcribed, so it didn't matter to the school . Only excuse is that he didn't join the UK school system until year 4, but that still gave them two years to pick up on it.
"Schools receive more funding the more kids on IEP's they have." I'm afraid not ...
It means they recognise there is a problem that needs extra support in school.
funding for additional support comes from the school budget
Whichever way local authorities choose to allocate funding for low cost, high incidence SEN, they will still be required to give mainstream schools a notional SEN budget from the Schools Block. This might be made up of funding from the basic per-pupil entitlement, deprivation and low cost, high incidence SEN factors.
No school action/school action plus, no place on the SEN register, no place on the SEN register no need for an SEN budget.
It was once quoted to me a while back that not every child on School action + needs the addition 15 hours, and it is up to the school whether they give the child the 15 hours........so that tells me that the funding was there for the 15??? but could be spent however the school saw fit.
The funding was not there for 15 hours. The school is expected to pay for up to 15 hours support - but they are not given money to do so.
Putting a child on to SA or SA+ does not and did not mean that you get more money.
2 of my children are or were on SA+ and the school certainly doesn't get any extra funding for them.
We were told by professionals who stepped in on our behalf (and made a big difference) that the school had (at the time) additional funding to supply 15 hours extra support for pupils on SA+
How long ago is this?
This may be something your LEA did, but I don't think that was ever standard for the whole country.
Being on SA+ means that you're under an outside professional, such as an SALT, OT or the ASD team. That's all that SA+ means.
These outside professionals used to be employed by the NHS or the LEA and didn't cost the school (although the amount of hours they could use may have been limited.)
SA+ never implied that you were eligible for 1:1.
mind you saying all that I suppose it depends how your council delegates its funding.
it depends how your council delegates its funding. - yes, I think this is it. Most councils didn't fund it in the way your describe.
Sorry CalicoRose x-posted. February this year. Our Ds was left with very little help for some time, We were told that he couldn't be assessed by the Educational Psychologist because the school didn't have the funds. It was actually 2 members of the NHS team who diagnosed him that interveined.
OP this sounds like a sensible approach from the school to me.
Every school's budget has a chunk which is designated for special needs but it's based on the number of children in the school and part of the general budget. Putting children onto SA or SA+ doesn't come into it. Historically statemented children attracted extra funding but this is changing too, so that school's have to fund part or all of the 1:1 themselves.
hillyhilly the school like they are being proactive and supportive, which is a really good thing - I wish our school had been as forward thinking when my ds1 was in infants.
Having said that, ds2 was on school action for two years, after a serious illness resulted him losing many of his skills. He had some group sessions and some 1:1 support and was able to come off the SEN register after two years (y1 and 2) with no further problems. He's now in Y4, loves school and is achieving really well.
DewDr0p No they don't have to fund it themselves - that sounds like they have to just find/squeeze the money from somewhere, they have to fund it from the devolved funds which are specifically for that purpose.
Previously SEN budgets have not been ringfenced, meaning the school can, in theory, use the money elsewhere. Under the new system they will have to use their devolved SEN budget (which they have always had, but will now be increased according to levels of SEN/Statemented/Deprivation etc) to pay for the first £6,000 of every statement. That plus the average £4,000 pupil premium that all schools get for every single pupil they have on their roll adds up to £10,000 max per statemented SEN pupil. This has been done to ensure that funding is the same across all LEAs as well as across mainstream and specialist schools. The idea being that parents of pupils with SENs will have more say in the school their child attends, be it in or out of county and ms or ss, without LEAs claiming one school option is cheaper than another.
Basically, in the past the statement would have come with that £6,000 (or however much the cost of the statemented support is) being handed over when the statement was issued or renewed. Now the school will receive a larger, devolved block of funding to cover £6,000 for each statemented pupil, rather than getting individual funding. Statements for over £6,000 will be topped up by the LEA.
Some people are predicting the new system has the potential to cause problems for some schools who have a high number of non-statemented SEN pupils. They are concerned that majority of the budget is going to go to statemented pupils, not leaving enough for those that are un-statemented. However, should this situation occur, schools will be able to request further funding to cover the deficit.
It's really all about equalising funding across school type and geographical boundaries, but as all new systems we will won't know how effective it is until it happens.
Changes to SEN funding means the school has to pay for the first 15 hours from their own budget not that there is additional funding for all pupils on school action plus.
There will still be a SEN budget in the same way as there has always been, it's just not ringfenced. So, after they've paid for all statemented support (which incidentally, they no longer have to buy in from LEA, but can shop around for) they do not 'legally' have to spend any remaining SEN budget on providing SEN support. I have heard of it being used to carpet schools and build classrooms, while pupils on the SEN register go without adequate support.
I would see this as a positive thing. DS2 had some difficulties with holding a pen, and did not develop 'handedness' until Y1. I don't mean that he could write with either hand, I mean that he could write with neither. His Maths & reading were also advanced. It later emerged that he also had other needs with regards to social communication and distractibility. At his infant school he was given no support at all. Luckily his junior school was the opposite.
The school usually will "seek your permission" for anything like that. It doesn't meant he SENCO wasn't certain.
Ds is on an IEP for pronunciation SALT. It is reviewed about every 1/2 term and it is discussed with me and I sign it to say I agree with it. They first approached me along the lines of "is it okay?" but it wasn't really a case of them not being sure, just polite way of approaching it.
I didn't develop a dominant hand until year 2. I can still write okay with either hand, though better with my right, but I do a lot of things with my left. Being ambidexterous I'm told is linked with dyslexia, which I may have mildly. I was always a very advanced reader (and maths), but my writing struggled.
Join the discussion
Please login first.