Hi Stary

I'm right behind you, in every sense of the word!

Just to update you all..

we had a meeting with the LEA yesterday to try and come to an agreement before it reaches tribunal. Did not get very far managed to get some bits more specific but mostly it got us nowhere. I have a great lady helping me with this who really knows her stuff (thanks Davros). However we spent the best part of 2 hours arguing that DS needs to have people who know how to use pecs around him at all times and for the school to use pecs throughout the day instead of just at snack time. The teacher really doesn't seem to get PECS at all and keeps talking about symbols and routines. I was trying to explain that increasing Ds PECS vocabulary is essential to his learning the rest of the curriculum as he has such a limited understanding and PECS is the only way he can communicate and learn new words.

ah well I guess we will see what happens a the tribunal.... (will update in Feb).

BTW thank you very much you lovely ladies for persuading me to continue when I was ready to give up. Im so glad I didnt.

Whenever someone tells me I am 'getting something', when I am whinging about how useless it is, I've started to ask them directly.

'OK, what outcomes have their been for DS as a direct result of your input?'

'How do you know that those outcomes were down to your input?'

Even better to get it in writing, because you can see clearly where your and the LA opinions of provision differ.

Their waffly scrabbling around to answer your question will be good evidence to show they don't know what they are doing, - or at least it shows you clearly in advance what their arguments against you will be.

hth

Not necessarily.It depends on how well you know your stuff and your child. The salt is not going to write anything other than the most vague intervention plan (one that will be feasible in context of huge caseloads and understaffing).It is your job to disregard that (it is not your problem or issue) and think about how best to specify and quantify what you feel your son needs.

Hopefully that will tally with what peopel like the SALT say but it may not, so in that sense you have to fight yuor corner in a logical manner.

thanks everyone.

would I need a new SALT report to back up my argument?

And EVERYTHING needs to be written as meaningful provision, otherwise what's the point of writing it down?

Can you ds imitate? If his imitation skills are coming on that can be evidence why makaton wasn't appropriate but is now iyswim?

Ask Makaton to cite the evidence there is to show it is useful. Stick the references into yuor submission. It's a lot harder to argue with research than with opinion.

The words to remember are 'specify' and 'quantify' so if either OT or SALT recommend stuff, think of how it can be translated into meaningful provision.

Thus

'close ocntact will be maintained between school and home' won't wash.

'The SALT will visit X in his school for an hour every week' will.

With me?

Have you looked at IPSEA website for assistance? Please do. Very useful.

I really need help -I have to get this bloody appeal thing off asap. I cant get hold of the lady from IPSEA who was helping.

How do I provide evidence for Makaton if DS doesn't currently use it?

Would I need whole SALT and OT reports to change the vague parts into meaningful provision?

staryeyed Good grief! Got my pom-poms going.

Firstly, you are NOT being OTT. Not by a million miles so stay confident. Secondly, the school has probably employed that tactic IN ORDER to curb you now. Once they've all been trained in PECS and Makaton, they're hardly going to throw out the one person they learnt the skill for are they?

I should imagine that in 6 months or so when it has all settled down there would be no point in throwing you out, - or, - you'll still be battling away and you can argue that they are not in a position to decide given that they haven't completed their training on how to meet his needs.

make sure you push for makton training to cover the levles 1-8 am fighting LEA to have recognised that 3 hrs does not mean staff are makton trained especially as ds way beyond them , and how they are ment to be teaching him new signs etc when they cant communicate

Well, if they don't use it neither will he ever be able to or even access it to facilitate communication.

Bloody hell!!!!

Ds does not currently use makaton- he has always had limited immitation skills. I thinkit would be very useful to help Ds understand language (visual) and he has some immitation skills now. They said as he doesnt currently use it he couldnt have it.

Glad Pyramid were helpful.
They have clear written guidance on what is and isn't an acceptable level of training that you could cut and paste into relevant document.

Why was makaton refused on statement?

Well I contacted Pyramid who confirmed that they do not have proper training- they were very helpful.

This just confirms my belief in why the head has been so evasive and given me politicians answers. However I do feel worried as she did say DS would be accepted at the school fo r a trial period of 6 months. Im worried that she will say they dont meet his needs if we kick up a huge fuss.

Pheonix- we wanted makaton on ds statement but it was refused even though the school apparently have had some makaton training {hmm].

staryeyed Im in almost same situation as you am going to be taking Lea to tribulaan over salt, makton and pecs training or lack of sinc ethey already failed to implent the makton traing thats in his sxtatemet 3 hrs is all they had lol i did 48 hrs plus of makton and the proper pecs course

Contact PECS Educational Consultants who will I am sure be very helpful and send you something you can copy and paste which states quite stiffly that if you haven't done the 2 day training course, you are not in any way able to use or implement PECS effectively.

dragging up my old thread but Im have to get my appeal off and I still feel as confused as I did when I wrote this. I really cant seem to get my head around it.

How do I argue the PECS thing in a tribunal (that all staff have to have attended the PECS pyramid course opposed to "PECS trained".) what evidence would I have to provide. SALTS so far have not done much with PECS so how do I show that the Pyramid training is essential?

Do I need a SALT and an OT report to argue the "up to " and the "as needed" or is it enough that the hours have been vaguely specified already?

Oh staryeyed I don't know, but keep going. I admire your resolve. You are an inspiration and I hope to follow in your footsteps (although god only knows I shouldn't have to)!

so have received finalised statement. Not as bad as I originally thought.We did get the school of our choice and nearly all of my proposed changes and there were a lot! . Anyway the sticking point seems to be the SALT and OT and PECS provision

I still have an "up to 6 weeks" on the SALT part.

An "when needed" on OT

and "PECS trained" rather than Pyramid trained.

for some obscure reason they have also taken out a 1:1 that they had originally written in the draft statemetn they suggested.

Did not sign anything as there is nothing to sign anyway.

What should I do next log an appeal with sendist or try with Dispute resolution service?

I so feel for you Stary.Starlight is right-ignore all 'the panel has decided' crap. You would not believe what is possible if yuo just keep on standing your ground. A few hundred quid on PECS 2 day training is a hell of a lot less to pay than a tribunal (even if they 'win')

Don't sign anything if you are not happy.
Get onto IPSEA and SEN:SOS.
Contact Pyramid for advice on how exactly to word the PECS bit.

Hang in there-it will be worth it.

Thanks Starlight. I feel so worn down by it all. Ive got the DLA tribunal next month. Next will be the transport issue, which we didnt get for DS nursery. 2 non sleeping children.....blah blah blah.

Staryeyed You're doing great. Keep going. You're not paranoid. You are not asking for the moon. You will get there.

Your DS is lucky to have you.

I did say I would take it to tribunal. I kept getting same answer "nothing they could do as it hadnt been allowed. I think the managers make the decisions in panel. I have to see how it is phrased in the final statement so that I can argue with it. I think it will say someting along the lines of "PECS trained". which I, at no point, agreed with. I may take the final statement to some SN legal people to check. Ditto for OT provision. I have no idea how they have phrased that one either. At every point thay have tried to make every provision vague and meaningless and I believe there is an under current of deception, manipulation and conspiracy (without meaning to sound paranoid) confirmed by the fact that a person called me yesterday to discuss finer points of statement who is not an LEA officer but works for DS's pre-school team .

threaten them with tribunal see how they aswer then .I found muttering that and ipsea to them in meeting as got what i wanted

Panel?

Who is panel? Ask them.

Nothing 'they' could do? Ask them who is 'they'?

You've come so far already. You might have to 'put up' with things sometimes 'in interim', but make sure that it is written somewhere that you do not agree and that you do not accept and keep banging on about it at every opportunity.

For now, - get the names of the 'panel' and the 'they' and the bosses of 'they'.

Don't believe 'they' can't do anything, and never let it be recorded that you accept their decision. You can't teach a child without a communication system.

This is the finaliosed statement. I spoje to them and said that I wanted the PECS training to be in there buut they said that it had already been decided by panel and there was nothing they could do.

Hmmm, it isn't going to be the finalised statement is it?

Keep going staryeyed. You may feel relieved that they have given you the school you want but that isn't a reason for you to compromise on provision.

Can you tell them this before you get the 'finalised' statement because it will only have to go back again!

I'd stand my ground.If they don't have PECS training, they can;t meet his needs.Simple as that.

They have agreed to name the school we want on the statement. However, they are still arguing about the PECS training part. I have not seen the finalised statement but it should be sent soon.

'all staff will have received basic 2 day PECS training (in the last 5 years).'

** will have unlimited access to his PECS books. All staff who come into regular contact with ** will have received official PECS training in order to ensure that ineffective communication is not a barrier to his learning. These staff will include, but not exclusively be, his classroom teacher, his 1:1...........

I'm very new to this so I expect you'll get better answers, but in case you don't I think this is a good start.

cyber Thank you for your recommendation.

This was the suggested phrasing on Ds1 statement that the LEA offered how do I change it to reflect properly PECS trained staff either through the course or by a supervisor:

"An environment where ** has access to his PECS book and staff trained in PECS throughout the day, and visual support to prevent him becoming confused/distressed and isolated."

I have to wait on the decision made by panel and take it from there. I wont know until Wednesday. I meanwhile I am trying to sort out the other parts of the statment. I have since talked to the LEA officer, The OTs manager and tried to sort this part out. The more questions I ask the more defensive they become.

"cyber We're in contact with RGO. Not used her yet.Would you recommend?"

Yes definitely very experienced and reliable. The approach is not pure VB/ABA - but she can explain it better than me !

They talk about it in the book I linked to in another post. (Although as American, it compares a Cadillac to a Chevy.I keep on getting confused about which is the best though!)
I think it comes from legal responsibility to provide an adequate/appropriate education and not necessarily the best. In which case, the onus on you is to prove that what is on offer in both inadequate and inappropriate.

I've heard it as well. Wandsworth council accused one of its residents of wanting a "Rolls royce service" for her child.

LOL StarlightM - I'd heard it was once said in a high court hearing by someone but don't know if that is an urban myth...

It's a stupid term used to make parents think they are asking for the moon.

It implies that you are asking for more than a functional vehicle to get your child to where they need to be.

However if a 'rolls royce education' is what your child needs to reach their potential, well then that is what needs to be delivered.

I suspect however, that the authorities in question don't know their cars, and think a rusty 10yr old fiesta is a Rolls Royce!

Where does this 'rolls royce education' thing come from? Because I've heard it said too - anyone know??

Staryeyed Do you have a plan of action yet?

SALT here is once in a blue moon, at a SN class and shared with everyone else.

Apparently this is better because it is the 'natural' environment.

I told her the SN class was NOT a natural enviroment and if that was what she wanted she could visit us at home in THE natural environment, which, amazingly she agreed to, but only once!

SM, maybe some of these children are being educated outside of your LEA? That is the route we had to take because local provision was unsuitable.

We were told we wanted a 'rolls royce education' (because we wanted twice weekly SALT and weren't willing to accept one visit a term) and she has this now at her new school.

cyber We're in contact with RGO. Not used her yet.Would you recommend?

Electra I cannot imagine for one minute that any other parent has questioned the service in my area because the provision offered shows a distinct lack of challenge.

We are going to get 1 hour a week of autism support, a termly IEP review. We have been reassured that 'some' of the staff went on TEACCH training last term, and that they are launching a feedback system to collect comments from parents to use as evidence of effectiveness.

How the frig can they have gotten away with this so far unless no-one (not even LA inspectors, Chief Exec, parents or Scrutiny) has ever challenged them?

Starlight and moondog - couldn't agree more. And yes, I think a lot of parents do just take what they are told on face value, unfortunately. Staff who encounter parents who rightly question the arrangement that their (vulnerable!) children will have to live with, and the education that they will receive are forced out of their comfort zone and this makes them indignant. What they seem to ignore is that those of us who have fought for better provision don't have anything that we are not legally entitled to - why should we not realise our child's rights??

All so so so true ladies.

Another gem is 'We all have X's best interests at heart.'

Oh really? In that case, why is noone doing anything about a system that is so ineffectual and amateur that it is shameful?

Staryeyed As I have just said on another thread, I will believe they have my ds' best interest at heart when they start to give up their free time and sacrifice their relationships with other family members for him like I am doing. Only When they can match me in that level of commitment will I believe that they truly care as much as me.

That 'other people don't question us' line is quite boring. The answer to that is of course 'Well they should do, and you would be encouraging it if you wanted the best for those children!'

That is also my experience starlightMckensie. Everyone acts suprised that Im being so difficult, like why wont I accpet that he will get help and be grateful. I cant count how many times they have said "we only working in the best interests of Ds1" . One of the workers from the pre school intervention team said that the other parents she works with accept vague meaningless things on their statements and asked why I didnt too. I think many of them dont know to question things. AS for independent advice. It doesnt exist unless you go looking.

cybers I'm getting the impression that most parents DO just sign for anything offered. I'm learning that representatives of the LA lie, that they use emtotional blackmail by mentioning other children that aren't getting a service if/when you take up their time or insist on more, they tell you you are extremely lucky to have what you have. They imply that they are on your side and trying to help you and that if you cross them or disagree they will withdraw their help.

I asked a very simple question of the Advisory Service 'what evidence do you have that supports your method of intervention'. They answered that they were very surprised to get that question from a parent. If I was buying in an agency directly (and any other parent for that matter) that would surely be the first question asked before we would spend a penny on them.

This school should be grateful that such a committed parent will improve their outcome statistics for their vulnerable pupils.

What were the supposed advantages of the other school ? Why would it be supposed to meet his needs ?

It's not a crime to ask 'too many' questions. The school should welcome it as a sign that you are a committed parent. But I have had this reaction too - as if it is strange that a mere parent would want to know what happens in a particular school. Do we get a skewed view here on MN ? Are there parents who just sign for anything the LEA advises ?

I've heard that you need to present a balanced view. So focus 52% of your case on why the school of choice will meet your lo's needs, and 48% on why the other will not. Praise the non-chosen school on a general level, but stick to your guns about it not meeting your 'specific' needs. It will give you more credibility.

Don't just launch into running down the alternative iyswim.

Parental preference for a school is the starting point and does carry a lot of weight. The decision for a school is made by an education officer and the 'panel' is just a bit of window dressing.

If you haven't already been to the other school suggested, visit, appear open and then have good reasons as to why it would not meet his needs. Good Luck.

Staryeyed I cannot offer you much but my thoughts and prayers and of course curses for those responsible for your angst.

I think I am about a year behind you. Please don't give up. You have done everything right. Your lo is lucky to have you.

Oh dear.

The headmistress has now said that she is not sure the school can cater for DS needs and has suggested another school for him. I think its because Im asking too many questions. I think I have got a reputation as being difficult because I dont just accept things as they are. The school she is suggesting, is not appropriate. It will now go to panel to be decided and my case worker did not even inform me. I had to ring her to find this out.

Ask to see Pyramid documentation re consultancy visists.

Indeed.

Ask to see documentation and/or a list of staff with specific training by thier names (and dates). They may indeed be well trained in which case she should be happy to share info.

The average OFSTED bod knows eff all about PECS so that means nothing.

Most places can use PECS at snack time.The important point is how often is it used at other times.

Finally the head teacher answered my questions with:

"the majority of my staff have Pyramid training as has my PECs co-odinator. school has aslo been monitored by pyramid to make sure we are doing it properly!

Pecs is one part of a total communication system involving symbols, signs and speech. visual symbols are used throughout the school, the school day and subject teaching. we had a glowing report on PECS in a previous OFSTED.
pupils also use PECS at break and lunch times to request their food."

Not exactly answering my q of whether the coordinator is an implementer or supervisor or how often it is used in the day.

No Moondog, this was never said, the official line was that she was supposed to work with PECS, but she didnt use it and wouldnt make targets for it and even made reference towards pprefering other methods. Instead she made speaking targets which for my non verbal Ds was pointless.

I think if I did complain there would be a big cover up - they have never been straight and sometimes have been outright manipulative with the truth from the beginning. The service sounds fantastic on paper but in reality they can not offer anything like the number of hours they propose to, The staff lack the training and experience they need, and they all talk like bloody politicians- You seriously can not get a straight answer from them. I have wanted to complain many times but felt I would be shooting myself in the foot as some service is better than none.

The fact that a pre school intervention team specifically for autism would hire a SALT that doesnt support PECS speaks volumes

What do you mean by this?
Have they told you this?
Ask for a written statement on what they do and don't advocate.

As I said, would be documenting all this to put in a devastating letter of criticism to be sent to very many people.

Im pretty sure it is a waste of time moondog. But then nothing has been what its supposed to be. The fact that a pre school intervention team specifically for autism would hire a SALT that doesnt support PECS speaks volumes- another ticking the box service, I feel. Nursery despite having SALT and being PECS trained have made no progress with his PECS at all, despite DS1 being very capable of learning new vocab. I have lost faith in government funded SN services or maybe its just my borough.

Also I did email head and called again and have still had no response.

Are they doing the smae tihng?
If not,I suspect it's a waste of energy.

We have one salt through school and one through pre school intervention team.

I woukld be writing to the head (and ccing it to everyone else) listing your failed attempts to make contact.That will embarrass them.

I would seek assurance that PECS person is indeed an implementor (ask to see documentation .PECS are very strict, and quite rightly so about terms and conditions.)

PECS themselves shouod be able to give you some written support to back up your wish that all people involved have PECS training (why 2 SALTs though?)

I wil ltell you categorically that unless all people on board are singing from same hymn shett as it were, most intervention is a waste of time, irrespective of numbers involved.

Moondog, I was assuming that the PECS coordinator is trained to train in PECS i.e. is an implementer or supervisor: www.pecs.org.uk/services/certification.htm . Since talking to the teacher I'm not sure she is. Plus I have been trying to speak the the head mistress since last Friday to clarify. I have called everyday but she hasn't returned any of my calls even though I have been assured she is receiving my messages.

Ideally I would like it in there but panel have rejected it and I don't have any reports to really back up how necessary it is both the SALTS he has worked with are not PECS focused. Now because I have been unable to clarify with the head IM not sure what to do and I have until Thursday to respond to the 2nd proposed statement.

Stary, why have you removed the reference to PECS?
Unless people have been on 2 day course, THEY ARE NOT PECS TRAINED.

The 'in house training' is not PECS training.

Contact Pyramid Educational Consultants for confirmation that they would reject these people's affirmation that they are 'PECS' trained.

Ignore what the case worker says and stick to your guns.
If she comes out with crap like this, ask her where it is written and is it leggaly binding.

I spoke to the OT who had been told by her manager that she couldn't really write anything more specific and it would be up to the OT who would assess Ds how much input he would get. I said that she should be able to give a professional opinion of what he should receive otherwise the statement could not be amended. She said she will speak to her manager and get back to me on next week. I don't know if she will be able to get back to me before I have to respond to the latest amendments. They are so flipping tied, they all come out with the same- "I'm not allowed to specify" etc.

The thing is in terms of PECS provision The SALTs he currently work with don't really use PECS much and mainly focus on pre verbal skills. I went on the course so we use it at home and he uses it with the preschool intervention team but at nursery I think they too use it for snack time and a few specific sessions. PECS is barely mentioned in the SALT report anything relating to PECS in the statement I actually added so I have no real backing except the intervention team report.

Thanks for those pages Electra I will quote them at the case worker worker.

I think LEAs will accept independent reports because they know a tribunal will. We had to get an EP one and one for SALT and the LEA has included parts in her statement as we requested.

It is a pain and expensive but probably the best way to go.

Yes I did speak to IPSEA and SOS;SEN who both helped a lot but suggested getting a private OT report. I am trying to avoid that if possible because they are so expensive and I think my LEA will dismiss it anyway. I will though, if the OT is unhelpful. IPSEA said I should insist on PECS training but I wondered if there is anyone who has personal experience or anything I can quote because its just being rejected.

Grrrrrr, on your behalf staryeyed! They are trying to write a wooly worded statement so that they will not be bound legally to fund the provision - don't let them get away with it.

LEAs should quantify and qualify provision set out in a child's statement - and it is their responsibility to do so. See here for the legal perspective on this and you could write a letter to your LA, reminding them of their obligation. If the reports you have are wishy-washy, consider getting an assessment/report from an independent EP which you could use to persuade the LEA that what you are asking for is reasonable, or failing that it would certainly be useful if you went to tribunal - panel members absolutely do listen to independent reports (one of the main points raised at our tribunal by a panel member was a report which said that dd needed autism-specific teaching and this was in an independently obtained report).

You can't insist that staff are PECS trained - but if you wanted to get that into your ds's statement you could appeal the statement and go to tribunal. In this event you would need to have evidence (in the form of written reports from a professional) which shows your child needs to work only with staff who are PECS trained.

'the case worker said that its not for the LEA to dictate how the school spend their budget or train their staff).'

This is irrelevant in that the buck stops with the LEA when it comes to responsibility for funding a child's provision. If the school can't pay for it, the LEA has to cough up - there is case law on this - see here HTH.

Hi staryeyed,

Have you talked with IPSEA, SOS;SEN or ACE about these issues?. I would think one of the above would be helpful to you in these circumstances. I only wish I could be more helpful here myself but I do not know these particular answers. I would try one of them and run parts 2 and 3 past them as they are now written.

Best of luck.

Attila

WE have gone through the statementing process so far we have rejected the 1st proposed statement and had a meeting with the case worker with the draft of the statement with my amendments. Our school choice was agreed to but they wanted to remove all references to PECS trained people working with Ds. I was told that the case worker had spoken to the head mistress who had confirmed all staff are PECS trained so it was irrelevant anyway. I agreed to contact the school myself and if the staff were all properly PECS trained to have it removed from statement. However it seems although they have a PECS coordinator they are given in house training only and I am currently trying to find out from the school if the coordinator is trained to train because it sounds as if the school is not using it correctly - I spoke to a class teacher who said they use it for snack time[sigh]. I have left several messages since last Friday with headmistress who has not got back to me I keep being told she is busy.

I had also requested that the Occupational therapist write more specific input recommendations but they have also come back quite vague. The SALT has quantified input but says " up to" which I requested they removed. I will contact the OT but I am hitting a brick wall in terms of getting the statement to be specific and quantitative. The professionals writing the report say they are not responsible for quantifying input and the LEA say that they can only include what the professional have written.

So my questions are :

1) Even though DS is going to a special school can I insist that staff are properly PECS trained? (the case worker said that its not for the LEA to dictate how the school spend their budget or train their staff).

2) is there anything I can quote at OT to get them to write more specific recommendations?