Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on special needs.
This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
ECHP (lewisham) transfer this week, can I ask you to be my sounding board?(21 Posts)
Yeah think you're right, after I posted this I saw some of the other threads where they'd posted, they seemed very determined.
There are a number of threads where a post by sendpass has been deleted. I haven't seen whatever was posted, but looking at the threads in question and the poster's name I'm guessing it was someone using this board to advertise.
Oh what happened here then? Just checked the boards and this popped up.
Did I get trolled? Can anyone shed any light? Never been trolled before....
Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.
Thanks so much for all your help
Section B is being amended to reflect ds current strengths and needs. SLT/OT/physio updated reports will be amended and their recommendations added. They are going to an EP assessment, so that's up-to-date.
Still a way to go and I will be checking all amendments. Once that's done, we can do outcomes.
Oh section B will have to be re-written as they have simply used an overview of ds that was written when he was 6yrs old and first awarded a statement.
If it wasn't so important it would be really funny!
Wish me luck first meeting at 9.30am tomorrow
You can't appeal section E.
You need to look at the needs set out in section B and check whether they are fully and adequately prescribed. The provision in section F has to be capable of meeting all the needs in section B.
They certainly can't put in as provision support you give him at home. Cheeky buggers, as you say.
Sorry did you mean can appeal Section E or can't.
I was up until the early hours going through the code plus IPSEA checklist. They have the outcomes in E and F with provision running along side. Ds needs are all educational so that would be appropriate. Slt and OT are both targeted as I essentially agreed the reports and targets with both respectively.
I have made notes re: the learning style and will be requesting an EP assessment to target those.
One thing they have picked up from notes made in the statement is, the school and I have an arrangement whereby on occassion ds will be excused from homework and will be asked to look at a particular subject or topic that the class will be working on in the future.
Ds responds well to pre-learning and the school exercise this in literacy and maths in school, but were struggling to fit it for topic/project work. I then said ok, instead of giving ds homework on these occassions, set him some research on the topic and we will go through it at home, so that the topic isn't new to him.
In a year the school have only asked me introduce the Tudors to him and ancient Greeks which have been termly topics - works well everyone's happy. The thing is that the transfer team have picked this and put it on the provision, cheeky buggers. That will be coming off!
It's not necessarily wrong to couple E and F together, and in fact that sounds like an improvement on the one I saw. They do need to make sure that it is clear which is which, and also that outcomes in Section E are SMART - ie. specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-limited. However, you can't appeal against section E.
NoRunAround sorry misunderstood what you said. Yes that's what I intend on going with. I'm also going go insist that he is assessed with and without his LSA
NoRunAround. Ds is very adamant that he needs his LSA and OT to help him.
Icimoi. I was hoping you'd come back, all my provision has been added to section E&F which have been coupled together.
Do you know where I can get a code of practice?
I saw a Lewisham EHCP that was dreadful. They had put all the provision into Section E, which is supposed to be limited to outcomes, and Section F contained about 5 lines of useless waffle rather than the detailed and specific provision required under the Code of Practice. However, I hope for everyone's sake that they have improved since then.
Have a look at the stuff beginning at page 164 of the Code of Practice which sets out what is supposed to be in an EHCP, especially the part about Part F, noting that it goes so far as to put in bold type what must be in an EHCP, i.e. emphasising that this is not optional. Not that that is preventing many LAs from totally ignoring it so far
I don't know your son at all, but would be tempted to point out to that EP that he doesn't appear "severe enough" precisely because the support he's receiving enables him!!!
If you and the LA are happy with existing reports, there's no need to obtain new ones. See 6.7 www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/414952/SEND_Reforms_transitional_advice_March15.pdf
Sorry should have said, he's been assessed by an OT and SLT
What concerns me about that is if the reassessments say he needs less help. I have honed ds statement for four yrs. SLT & OT have already provided their reports and give their recommendations which I agree with. I'm just worried that an EP comes in and says he needs less one to one with his LSA. The last one we saw (although didn't see ds for very long in class) indicatef that he possibly wouldn't be severe enough to get the provision he had whilst he had at that time.
It appears from your post that the LA has given notice they will be transferring your dc. It is important to understand a "transfer' doesn't mean a transfer of his SSEN to another document, the EHCP; what it actually means is he will be transitioning to the new system.
The LA must carry out a new assessment of his SEN. It is of concern they appear to have drawn up a draft plan without carrying out any assessments. Ipsea have useful info about what happens during an EHC assessment.
A wise approach would be to treat this "transfer" as though you were applying for a statutory assessment.
Ds 10yrs dx ASD. He attends mainstream and is expected to remain in ms for secondary. We're in LB Lewisham.
I have had the initial paper work through. A lot fairly ambiguous outcome/target which I will tie down, in terms of making them measurable and a time allotment to any activity. I have SLT and OT support on my statement but both of these are specific and targeted as, I'd made sure of this during our statement review in the autumn, a copy and paste job has been done in those areas.
The plan also indicates the 22.5 hrs support via LSA.
The plan has provided a profile of DS that was written when he was 6yrs old and therefore isn't current. Despite the fact that the SEN department have all of the up to date reports and every statement review has changed acoordingly the information regarding DS' needs and provision required.
The SEN team are not doing the transfers, a separate ECHP transfer team are doing the transfers.
I have a concern that if the overview of ds needs and difficulties are not current on the plan, then the transfer team will try to use that as leverage to change provision. Provision that was agreed earlier in the year.
I know that if the need has not changed then the provision must legally remain the same. I know that I need to see an LO list and that the LA can not tie ds provision to a pre-determined budget allowance.
Am I missing anything else? I know there at least one poster herethat has said this particular borough have been churning out poor plans. I have been on IPSEA too, I'm just trying to make sure I have all the info required.