Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.

School funding

(25 Posts)
inappropriatelyemployed Tue 02-Jul-13 09:06:15

New guide just out from Council for Disabled Children - here

WaitingIsWhatIDo Tue 02-Jul-13 09:12:57

That's the clearest explanation I have come across. Thank you.

Have they unblocked you then?

armani Tue 02-Jul-13 10:11:54

So this thing about school providing the first 6k funding does not come in until 2014??

inappropriatelyemployed Tue 02-Jul-13 10:13:58

No. That is in now. The changes to SEN law with the Children and Families Bill won't come in until at least Sept 14

Yes they have unblocked me but mainly because someone from here replied to them and I was then able to reply to that reply!

Further info on the blog

armani Tue 02-Jul-13 10:28:44

Ah right thanks IE.

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 10:38:15

Thanks IE. Although I am still confused (it doesn't help that I am terrible at maths and anything to do with budgets!) So sorry to keep repeating this...

I still need to work out how much it costs the LA to put my son in a mainstream primary school which has a SLT unit attached. I don't care where the money comes from - whether that pot of money is from school or from the LA. I also don't care about the cost of any top-up provisions. But what is the hard cash cost (paid by who-ever) to put my son in this school? Should I ignoring the £6k (because that's WHERE the money comes from, but it is not actual hard-cash cost)? Should I be looking at my LAs average weighted pupil unit (AWPU) as my starting point for a mainstream primary school (ignoring the SLT unit)? Is it the AWPU that will give me the hard-cash cost to place my son in a school?

Probably thought it was better to know what you were up to.

I think you should ignore all the nonsense tbh. The cost of the placement will be the same. SALTs do not charge less/more because of the funding changes do they?

AWPU is your starting point and then the pro-rata salary of a TA (for mainstream) or proportion of TA if a unit with higher staff-child ratio. Then the cost of a SALT at about £90 per hour (to be shared across no. of children in group unless individual). Then OT at roughly the same. Then transport if needs are such that getting to school safely is an issue. Then EP time at once a term? Autism Advisory teacher at once a term? Then add 20% for Autism Advisor/EP and TA for pension, holidays, sick, benefits and that should give you a rough idea.

zumbaleena Tue 02-Jul-13 13:02:45

Star...kindly advise. Is the above law of 6K per SEN kid going to come from a private nursery (attached to a mainstream private school) applicable too? My dd goes to such a nursery. She gets NEG grant, we pay extra from childcare vouchers and send our ABA tutors in (we pay for tutors).
Or is 6K the budget for all SEN kids in a class a school?

zumbaleena Tue 02-Jul-13 13:02:57

Is it in legal practice NOW?

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 13:17:30

I think you should ignore all the nonsense tbh. The cost of the placement will be the same. SALTs do not charge less/more because of the funding changes do they?

Star, my problem is that the LA is lying to Tribunal about the cost of putting my son into ANY primary school. So I have to know what the cost of ANY placement is WITHOUT the bolt-ons (they and I agree on the hourly rates of these bolt-ons).

Getting the correct figure is absolutely crucial because it is a matter of a few thousands between the actual cost of the LA compared to my indie school WITHOUT us having to argue over the contested provision.

So I'm not concerned about bolt-ons or where the money is coming from. I want to know is AWPU the accepted 'unit of measure' (for want of a better term) to decide how much is the hard-cash cost of any child.

Because, you see in the ridiculousness of my trip to Tribunal, if Essex County Council use their own AWPU and not the made up figure they've dreamt up from nowhere, their school is more than mine. If they use the AWPU, then their argument that the indie school is not in the interest of the public money is total and utter nonsense and my trip to Tribunal next week is all about institutional bullying.

Step away from the computer.... And breath....

You need to use the AWPU as it stands for a non-SEN pupil and forget about the £6k.

The £6k just refers to how much of the bolt on provision the school need to fund.

Zum, I don't know what happens with private. However if you have a statement it shouldn't matter either way for under 5's as the LA is responsible.

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 13:32:16

Thanks Star. And the AWPU is always for a non-SEN pupil NEVER for a SEN child?

Looks as though I'll be going into the hearing room with the judge wondering why we're all there! (I hope!)

Hmm, I'm not clear on this ATM. I 'think' the Awpu is calculated equally for every child, but will be above average per child if the school has above average SEN. Though it should be easy to find out the minimum.

The LA will argue zero costs because they aren't going to pay the teacher less, turn off a light because your child isn't there.

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 13:38:00

Star, they're not arguing zero cost - which hopefully is helpful because at least they are saying it is 'something'. But it's thousands less than the AWPU

Awpu is about £2.5k per child.

And why are your legal team leaving this to you? Surely they know the costs from other cases!?

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 17:02:04

They haven't. We have all the various figures inc the exact AWPU but I'm the sort of person that crosses all the ts and dots all the i's and leave nothing to chance. I don't understand how the LA is costing things and I'm not going to rack up huge legal fees trying to work out the LAs methodology. So I'm trying to work it out their methodology myself. In my own little way, I still vaguely hold onto the fact that the LA is acting decently and logically so therefore the lawyers and I must have missed something. But we haven't.

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 17:11:41

Basically, I keep thinking we've missed something so I keep asking these questions on MNSN but I always get the same answer. The LA have lied not used the correct figures. And it infuriates me because if they had used the correct figures, we would not be going to Tribunal.

inappropriatelyemployed Tue 02-Jul-13 17:46:40

Does your legal team agree that the figures are wrong? I would leave it in their hands or ask them to explain this. If you are paying them, that is what they are for and they should be able to explain the differences in costing.

TOWIELA Tue 02-Jul-13 17:53:39

Yes they do. But I still can't get my head around the fact that the figures are so wrong. Tbh I will totally be leaving this for the legal team next week - not my problem. But every-time someone mentions figures on here I get twitchy so I try again to justify the LA who are obviously using the correct figures because they would, wouldn't they? hmm

TOWIELA Fri 05-Jul-13 14:18:03

Just so that other's are aware about the use of AWPU in costings for mainstream schools, there is case law that this figure has to be the starting point. David Wolfe's wonderful Noddy Guide to Statements of Special Educational Needs details it on page 12.

When considering relevant "public expenditure" for the purposes of the Education Act 1996 s.9 the local authority's budgetary 12 arrangements for an individual school would usually be a sensible starting point. If those arrangements made provision for the payment of an age weighted pupil unit (AWPU) to the school there was no reason why the First-tier Tribunal should not accept that the AWPU, together with any additional costs specifically incurred in respect of the child in question, were a fair reflection of the cost to the public purse of educating the child at that school EH v Kent [2011] EWCA Civ 709

finallyasilverlining Fri 05-Jul-13 14:40:24

interesting thank you

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now