Draft ehcp what should I be checking for?

(7 Posts)
elliejjtiny Thu 08-Apr-21 11:31:31

I got ds (aged 7 year 3) draft ehcp emailed to me yesterday. I'm supposed to check I'm happy with it but I'm not sure what I should be looking for. They haven't included his younger brother in the family bit so I will correct that but not sure about anything else. The bit where they name the school and say how much money they will get has been left blank, is that normal at this stage?

OP’s posts: |
Sirzy Thu 08-Apr-21 11:34:40

Make sure what it says in section f is clear and not open to any interpretation.

The funding doesn’t go on the draft, does it at least say what kind of setting in the school part??

10brokengreenbottles Thu 08-Apr-21 11:54:16

A school shouldn't be named on a draft, neither should a type of placement.

As Sirzy posted, it is essential section F is detailed, specific and quantified. Otherwise it isn't worth the paper it is written on, and can not be enforced. No woolly, vague wording such as "access to" "would benefit from" "or equivalent".

Every educational need should be in B and should have corresponding provision in F. Anything that "educates or trains" should be in F, including things like SALT, OT, CBT and physio.

Don't worry about funding, it isn't your concern, focus on getting section F detailed, specific and quantified then it can be enforced. If the school need more funding they should approach the LA.

Here is IPSEA's checklist. SOSSEN offer a draft checking service too.

Ellie56 Thu 08-Apr-21 21:32:03

Agree with the above. Vague and woolly plans are not worth the paper they are written on, as there is no way of enforcing them.

Typical LA woolly speak:
"would benefit from"
"access to"
"opportunities for"
"regular"
"high level of "

All of your child's needs should be specified in Section B and provision to meet these needs should be specified in Section F.

Provision must be specific and quantified.

Eg Section B may say "X has difficulties with social communication."

Section F should then have something like, "X requires a social skills programme devised by a qualified speech and language therapist, experienced in working with children with autism, and delivered for 2 hours each week." That way if it doesn't happen, you can enforce it.

If it says something vague like "access to regular speech and language therapy" that could mean anything and is open to interpretation. Trying to enforce that will be like nailing jelly to a wall.

Nith Tue 13-Apr-21 11:36:26

Go through it by cross-referencing to paragraph 9.69 of the Code of Practice.

If the LA tells you it can't specify more detail because the experts haven't done so, tell them they need to go back to the experts to ask them to do their jobs properly.

elliejjtiny Tue 20-Apr-21 15:34:28

Thankyou. I've checked it all and it looks fine. Most of the support he is getting already. He is finally going to get a home school communication book which I ask for every year and only the year 1 teacher has done it, the other teachers have all said no.

OP’s posts: |
10brokengreenbottles Tue 20-Apr-21 21:13:22

Elliejjtiny it's so frustrating hearing schools refusing to do something as simple as a communication book when the difference it can make is significant. It is hardly like it is expensive or time consuming compared to some other SEN provision. Now it is in place I hope it helps.

Wow, I haven't seen or heard of an EHCP before where there wasn't some form of vague, woolly wording in the initial draft.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in