EHCP and the race to state

Obvious don't assume state will award EHCP. Lots of schools get applications rejected, abd then have to appeal (all of which can take over a year).

Have you talked to your school yet though to see how they will manage VAT increase? They HAVE known about this prospect for years so should have a plan whereby parents are not hugely impacted.

LAs often try to get away with this, but if their delaying makes them breach the statutory timescales, as it often does, enforcement action can be taken.

SALT is special educational provision and should be in F if it is reasonably required. The LA lied to you about the stammer. Same for MH therapies and therapeutic support. Parents often have to appeal for these though otherwise they are left with a poor EHCP without all the necessary provision and/or written poorly.

But if they didn’t accept your report, had one of their own done and that had a lot of the needs and provison omitted you would be able to appeal to tribunal, in your case the la haven’t followed the law but it doesn’t actually make any difference to you in practise

@BrumToTheRescue My LA liked multiple drafts because of the delay they caused - amendments were made due to errors or to change a few words that really made no difference.

I agree lack of CAMHS provision is a major issue. But the EHCP specifies provision in school around the mental health problems, not mental health treatment as such.

E.g. DD's EHCP specified SALT input for language processing (because it affected academic performance) but SALT input for a stammer had to be through her GP because that is a 'medical' issue that didn't affect her learning. There was provision for extra time in oral assessments because that would be affected by her stammer.

Anyway, I agree there are huge issues with underfunding of SEN provision. But from what I can see this thread is a rehash of arguments about 'my child NEEDS private school so VAT is UNFAIR'. Plus an assumption that no state mainstream can meet the needs of the child, without even looking at local provision.

So I'll let you crack on...

it’s not queue jumping though as the poorer needier families thst can’t articulate for themselves are still going to be left with nothing, it’s not like she’s taking a slot that they would have. The fact that poorer families are being let down isn’t a reason that all children should go without support in school, it shouldn’t be the case that ANYONE should have to hire a lawyer or become the equivalent of one by learning Sen law themselves just to get their child a basic education thst the rest of the population take for granted

It isn’t just zero tolerance schools that can’t provide EHCP level support without an EHCP. Especially if you consider many with EHCPs require therapies such as SALT/OT/MH therapies.

then send out a draft to school and parents for comment. If there are comments/changes another draft is produced etc. There can be several drafts. Then it is finalised

There only has to be a second draft if the LA wishes to make amendments that aren’t a a result of parental representations and decisions about the institution in I.

they conceded on the day for DS1.

This happened when we were appealing B&F (and D&H) in DS1’s existing EHCP last year. The LA’s barrister turned up late and conceded. Infuriating.

They can't if the ethos is zero tolerance, and considering each child's needs/provision in isolation.

Luckily DD was allocated a place at a school (not our first choice) that had recently entirely revised their SEN provision to recognise the huge increase in numbers of pupils whose needs were around mental health, neuro diversity etc rather than the traditional view based around specific learning disabilities.

Plus they integrated that approach throughout the school, so that the whole school was organised around recognising and supporting issues at the earliest possible point.

The support DD got before her EHCP was in.place was no different to the support she got with an EHCP, because the school had already identified and provided the support. The difference the EHCP made was in the funding received by the school. They are proactive in applying for EHCPs for that reason.

It is a standard comp, with an average number of pupils on FSM etc. OFSTED 'good'.

There's really no such thing as being referred for an EHCP. There is application to assess. The bar is set deliberately low. After 6 weeks this can be refused with right to appeal to tribunal. LA may concede before date.

The LA may agree to assess. This takes several months.

The LA might then conclude an EHCP is not needed. This can be appealed to tribunal. Once again the LA may concede before date but only just before.

The LA may agree to issue and then send out a draft to school and parents for comment. If there are comments/changes another draft is produced etc. There can be several drafts. Then it is finalised with parental preference of placement named. The final EHCP May be wholly and unenforceable because it is not specified and quantified but the content and/or placement can be appealed to tribunal.

So there are 3 times when appeal to tribunal may be needed.

Some LA's concede before the final tribunal date but by this point they have commissioned their own reports etc and try to fight it - they conceded on the day for DS1.

Assuming Labour consult on VAT on private school fees it is also worth any parent of a child with special needs responding to describe the impact on them. It may be possible to come up with a better system than just going with exemption for children with EHCPs.

I said many, not all. Many can’t.

Independent assessments aren’t only for the wealthy. For those who have to appeal and need independent assessments, there are charities such as Parents in Need who can fund them if parents can’t afford them. For those who need to appeal and are eligible, legal aid can also fund them if they are necessary. It isn’t about buying an EHCP. It is about ensuring you have evidence written correctly when many LA reports aren’t. Many LA reports are not comprehensive. They are vague and woolly with missing needs/provision/outcomes. That's before you consider the times where evidence from professionals isn't sought by the LA during the EHCNA. For example, many LAs unlawfully refuse to seek evidence from, e.g. OT or SALT, where parents have requested them under regulation 6(1)(h) of the SEN Regs 2014.

DD's school does put in TA support without it being in her EHCP. Generally once there are more than one or two pupils in the class needing additional support - the teachers are very competent and can manage if there are only one or two.

Obviously in conjunction with other provision, such as a room pupils can go to when they are feeling overwhelmed in the full class, so they can continue to study in a quieter and more supported atmosphere.

Etc etc

I don’t need a tribunal
as they had already said she’d get one.

but the law and what la’s actually do are two completely different things, most la’s don’t follow the law as regards Sen. Tribunal forces them to.

They didn’t even accept a report written by a neighbouring authority and they had one of their EPS look at it, assess her themselves and rewrite. The idea the wealthy can just buy an EHCP is abhorrent and not entirely correct.

The two private schools I teach in have a higher proportion of special needs children than the state schools I have taught in. One has 40% and the other has around 50%. Very few are on EHCPs. A lot of parents are looking for smaller schools with more flexibility. They are also trying to avoid the bottom sets in state schools which are a bit notorious. A lot of state schools vary enormously depending on what sets your child is in, some are basically running a grammar school style stream, middle sets (which get a bit of a raw deal) and then the bottom sets which include many of the children with severe behaviour problems (hard working, children with learning difficulties do not thrive in this environment). There has been no suggestion from Labour that they will do anything much to improve schools so I imagine things will remain the same. A lot of state school parents use tutors to try to improve their child’s chances.

Legally they have to accept private reports although I don’t dispute what you are saying as lots of la’s try it on, if op ends up going to tribunal, which is likely the private reports will be accepted

@Djthhtk9494 if I were to medicate my daughter to make her behave in a way that a school would like her to behave, which is not normal for her, I would feel that I was drugging her into submission.

You can do what you want with your kids, feel free. We all have our own circumstances. i was very careful to specify that this is how i would feel about my child. As far as I am concerned, the problem for my daughter is the restrictive environment and systems implemented to educate children en mass. In a different environment she would thrive and learn without the need for any medication at all.

But that’s not available in this country. So I would be using medication to push her into compliance with an overly restrictive system that does not suit her.

Such a blanket policy is unlawful. If parents appeal, SENDIST certainly considers all evidence including independent reports.

The wait times can be horrendous for the appointments too

Also in our area they will only accept EP reports written by their EPs.

If the LA hadn’t conceded for their failure to assess appeal it would have be 6 month to be heard. I appealed to SENDIST in Dec 2023 and we were listed for a paper hearing in May/June 2024.