Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.
comparing SALT results from 2 years ago to current results, help?(29 Posts)
Sorry for another thread but in a nutshell LA have sent me an amendment notice to DS's statement, haven't had annual review yet, they want to cut the SALT twice termly monitoring, SALT setting targets etc.
Trying to prove he needs the current level in his statement so if anyone can help then be very grateful.
In 2010 DS had these set of results from CELF per school assessment.
Linguistic concepts - percentile 1
Basic concepts - 75
Sentence structure - 9
Recalling sentences in Context - 25
Formulating labels - 5
Word structure - 25
New report - march 2013
Tested using CELF 4 subtest
Receptive language skills -
Concepts & following directions - 5th percentile.
Expressive language skills
Recalling sentences 2nd percentile
Formulated sentences 0.1st percentile.
These were the only tests carried out, that are recorded in his report.
Oh, it does say at the top that DS was assessed using TALC and he achieved competency in all 4 levels of assessment. It says research suggests that 65% of 5 year olds understand questions at level 3 and 4.
DS is now 9 3months.
Any help please? x
I think your case is extremely strong. However that doesn't really matter and won't really make them change their minds as they are taking their chances that most people wouldn't challenge this.
They are probably doing this to every single child with SALT in the statement, and if you PM me the name of the LA you are under I will do a FOI request to find out.
The best thing you can do (and I'm sorry it costs) is get a tribunal savv SALT to do an independent assessment and make recommendations. The benefit of this is that not only will you be able to argue to retain current provision but you'll probably have evidence that shows he needs more.
Thank you star for replying. Will pm you, that will be really helpful. I think a private SALT assessment is required too unfortunately.
Just bumping for any other input. Sent PM to you star, thanks.
There are no set in stone criterai about who gets an s/lt service based on assessment results. So much will depend on other issues like capacity.
Before you fight for anything, take a step back and really think hard about whether it is worth it. Quite often, perceived gains weighed up against hassle of getting something is an equation that doesn't add up. Unfair but true. I have jettisoned everyone from my child's life who cannot guarantee me a measurable outcome.
Thanks moondog, but do you think the results show clearly DS is not making progress? I am trying to do my best at home, know I could do more.
Ive no idea.
To measure progress you need to be comparing assessmet from one point in time to another point in time and see if there is any change.
If you use different assessments at two points in time you are not measuring the same things and communication is comprised of many different parts.
You also need to know that most s/lts would probably love to be able to do this but with their giant and disparate caseloads it is probably impossible. |Not enough hours in the day.
That's fair enough. I really don't know what to do.
Any 'natural' language examples which are exactly the same tasks as before?
Eg granny's birthday cards that she has saved
(2010 ds dictated happy birthday plus one 3 word sentence,
2011, 2012, 2013 ds dictated happy birthday plus one 3 word sentence)
Put on your shoes then brush your teeth
(2 instructions together, couldn't do it in 2010, still can't)
get out some of his literacy comprehension tasks from 2010 (if you have the old books) and make him do them again, see if he gets any more of it right
as moondog says, you can't properly compare different tests: but the scores in the first one caused enough professional concern for him to be allocated help...
and the current ones aren't ok (they definitely don't constitute evidence that your ds is a previously-needy child whose language has now normalised)
Would school let you in to do his group sessions once a week, cos if so you could ask for the statement to specify sessions once a week delivered by someone with this course and then volunteer to be trained
Thanks mareey will have a look, lots to think about.
It is of course important to remember that the size of SLT case loads or a service's capacity has absolutely nothing to do with whether your child has a SEN which legally requires provision under a statement.
If he was deemed to require SLT support on his statement and has been receiving it thus far, they would need cogent evidence of improvement to argue that this should now be reduced, especially if he is making progress.
Making progress could actually demonstrate that the intervention is working. Lack of progress could mean he needs more or something different.
It is not just the quantity but the quality which is important. Most SLT provision is not clearly or objectively measured and many SLTs deliver a one size fits all approach whatever their methodology as they don't work directly with the children and don't know the individual child.
Why not ask them to provide a report explaining these results and why they think they merit reduction? You might have to go down the independent route
Thank you inappropriately, have spoken to the SALT today, she told me that DS will still have her involvement but on statement it will be at least twice yearly as DS wasn't getting the twice termly visits that are currently on the statement as there has been insufficient staff, this just makes it official. .
I could kick myself I didn't sort this out before now, I could, should have fought harder to get DS what was in his statement. ( was in bubble of lovely school, great staff, DS happy).
She told me I can negotiate the wording on his statement to specify that he will see qualified salt instead of it just being implied but apparently they are changing all the salt provision in statement in county.
Starfish - the wording in the statement needs to reflect his needs not what the SLT can offer. If they were not providing his statements visits, they should be offering more to enable him to catch up rather than reducing the statement provision to reflect what they can offer as a service. That really is unacceptable.
And the suggestion that the statement could have been interpreted in a way which provides support from anything other than a qualified SLT is alarming .
You need a clear idea of what he needs and how those needs can be met. These people wouldn't accept it for their own children but are quick enough to brush parents off with substandard provision.
Provision on a statement in itself won't be the answer. The right provision will but I'm afraid my opinion of NHS SLT provision is very low. They seem to go out of their way on their block contracts never to work directly with children and yet tout themselves as having all the answers. Their interventions are largely immeasurable in terms of outcomes.
Are you in an area that does direct payments? Some LAs are piloting this. Working with someone prepared to spend time getting to know your child is a much more effective way of accessing support. Pumping out one-size fits all, generic interventions for all children while working through TAs is a disgrace. You wouldn't want a consultant in a hospital to deliver provision based only on what your surgery nurse tells him. I makes my blood boil that SLTs, OTs etc still think its acceptable to deliver provision third hand without spending any time getting o know and understand the individual child.
Yes the wording they want to update the statement is very unclear, to me as a parent it reads as teacher, senco will set targets and a salt will review when necessary.
I have had a quick look and our area does indeed do direct payments, DS already has a disability social worker, haven't seen her more than twice though but he is own their system. This could be an option. thank you.
It is direct payments for SEN that they need to be offering. If you need any help with that, I have been through my own application, so do PM me.
Well for me what I did would depend entirely on whether the twice termly input has helped him at all?
If this is the maximum input they are willing to provide and it isn't adequate then what is the point of fighting for it?
Step back. Look at him. Where he is. Where he's come from. What you think would really help him. Fight for that outcome.
Precisely zzzz. This is what I have also tried to say. Most SLTs in the NHS never even work with kids directly so why we even expect them to have any effect at an individual level is beyond me.
Finding out what works may mean getting an independent report particularly if this service is intent on feeding you the service capacity bollocks.
Thanks zzzzz and appropriately. I have lots to think about.
Starfish, I work with these tests all the time and I see little evidence of progress. His current scores are very low, particularly in formulating sentences and will impact hugely on his ability to cope with the demands of the curriculum.
The TALC score is encouraging from a functional point of view but isn't worth the paper it's written on in terms of tribunal. I would agree with appropriately that you need to have as much detail as possible in the statement about needs not resources, because though moondog has a point about not fighting for what doesn't benefit you, at this stage of the game you need to be playing for whatever support is available at secondary and it may become relevant in the future. Again an independent tribunal ready SALT could do much to make clear that progress is insufficient at present.
Thanks working for reply, very grateful for your opinion, been going through it all weekend.
Have spoke to IPSEA this morning, told me to email officer at LA that the section he quoted 8.126 (that they coukd amend atvany other time) code of practice just means that they have to write to me and tell me they are proposing to amend and that it still doesn't tell me under what law they are proposing to do it, section 27 education as I have been told is the following
Amendments to a statement
F32A(1)A local education authority shall not amend a statement except
(a)in compliance with an order of the Tribunal,
(b)as directed by the Secretary of State under section 442(4), or
(c)in accordance with the procedure laid down in this Schedule.
(2)If, following a re-assessment review, a local education authority propose to amend a statement, they shall serve on the parent of the child concerned a copy of the proposed amended statement.
(3)Sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) of paragraph 2 apply to a copy of a proposed amended statement served under sub-paragraph (2) as they apply to a copy of a proposed statement served under paragraph 2(1).
(4)If, following a periodic review, a local education authority propose to amend a statement, they shall serve on the parent of the child concerned
(a)a copy of the existing statement, and
(b)an amendment notice.
(5)If, at any other time, a local education authority propose to amend a statement, they shall proceed as if the proposed amendment were an amendment proposed after a periodic review.
(6)An amendment notice is a notice in writing giving details of the amendments to the statement proposed by the authority.
So anyone want me to compose an email to the LA officer? Am struggling to put one together this morning.
Join the discussion
Please login first.