Is it normal school asking us to pay for additional support?

I am aware of the sen crisis, obviously as my children are SEN.

But my experience of various private schools sen provision vs state sen provision is what I am discussing here.
State sen provision is much better and the schools are extremely supportive where we are.
Appreciate there are levels of sen needs too and different areas and schools will have different resources.
Not really lucky me, as noone wants their child to sruggle every day and to be in and out of school meetings each week about behaviour issues and deal with therapists and sencos and your child escaping school becuase they cant cope.
But i guess lucky me that the school is putting in place what they can do, and its a lot more than we were offered at private.. which was nothing. We arent loaded either, we paid our last pennies as we thought amall class sizes would be the answer, which turned out it wasnt.

It's unlawful for an LA to demand plan-do-review cycles before agreeing to an EHCP assessment.

Section 36(8) of the children's and families act 2014 states:

The local authority must secure an EHC needs assessment for the child or young person if, after having regard to any views expressed and evidence submitted under subsection (7), the authority is of the opinion that—
(a)the child or young person has or may have special educational needs, and
(b)it may be necessary for special educational provision to be made for the child or young person in accordance with an EHC plan.

I went through the entire hellish EHCP process and they tried to send schools application back and make them do two terms of Plan-Do-Review before taking the EHCP needs assessment application to Panel. The LA backed down when the school SENDCO reminded them of the law.

From a legal standpoint, for section A of the legislation, the LA have to accept any views and evidence the child may have SEN. Even parental concern is covered under the legislation because it's a "view". The law also specifies "has or may have", so again very little evidence is actually needed.

The only way to fulfil section B of the legislation is to actually do an EHCP needs assessment and do the statutory SALT and ED psych assessments. Plan-Do-Review cannot determine if a child needs an EHCP plan because it's not designed for that.

Also, for what it's worth 97% of parents win at EHCP related tribunals. I'm one of them 🤷🏽‍♀️. The experience has taught me that if a local authority insists on something time consuming, unless the thing they're asking is explicitly stipulated within legislation, it's a delay tactic to save them a few weeks of funds.

Lucky you, but the send crisis is well documented.

He’s only 4. IME it’s quite typical for kids of that age to make silly noises and have bursts of being destructive at times. They can get pretty overexcitable. They usually grow out of it.

If he behaves well with other kids when you observe him and you haven’t noticed him struggling with anything, I’d see how he goes.

IMHO the school (and you) should tell him he shouldn’t knock over other kids’ lego models as it’ll make them sad. If he keeps doing it, he should have a time out. But therapy seems heavy at 4.

Nope, recently, in my sons primary and secondary they are in now (I have two sen kids now). The support has been brilliant in both with no echps in place. Lots of free services, lots of support from specialists, sencos, therapists and teachers with trainijg in sen.

All the small, ‘nurturing’ private schools we approached for our AuDHD son for secondary turned him down. Gave me a very different perspective on private schools I must say. He’s doing really well academically at a local state secondary -they actually care about him and his education - the impression I was left with from the private schools was that the only thing they were interested in was their profit margin.

I keep seeing one of these schools advertising their ‘nurturing sixth form who support SEN’ on facebook so I added a comment “as long as you’re not ‘too SEN’” I couldn’t help myself. I felt how dare they sell themselves in that way when they turned my son down. But on the plus side I’m saving a ton of money, especially now I’d be paying VAT on top.

I would caution against getting to the point where things have deteriorated so much that moving to state would be the only option. As someone with a SEND child who was initially in independent (who indeed asked for more money to support them, whilst also failing to act in accordance with the Equality Act 2010), school based trauma from being in a setting that does not support SEND is very real and very damaging. 3 years later and my child still struggles with trusting the new state school and staff (who have been amazing in comparison to previous school) and it has had what I am sure will be a life long impact. State schools also offer wrap around care (our state school care starts at 7.30am and after school runs to 6pm), or you direct the money you are spending on independent fees to a nanny, childminder or au pair etc.

If the school is not able to meet the child's needs, move them. If spaces are limited, contact the LA to advise of the situation. If they are out of school for more than 15 days (does not have to be consecutive) then you can submit a section 19 request for the LA to provide an educational offer.

Independent schools are great for some children, but not all. That really is ok.

getting a diagnosis is a long and complicated process, and at the end of it all the diagnosis might not actually be very helpful in determining what support is required - dd is autistic, and the support she requires is dictated by where she has difficulties not her diagnosis.

also, sometimes ‘normal’ children need extra support too - other dd is neurotypical but at times has needed support. There is nothing to diagnose, but support has still been helpful,

I’d go and seek a proper diagnosis before forking out money on support he either may not need or the wrong type of support.

A SEN is not a doctor or specialist psychologist and should not be recommending ‘solutions’ without a diagnosis of a ‘problem’.

I am not making a judgement about whether your DS needs support or not - I don’t know. I am saying that any support should be based on the child’s real needs rather than because the teacher knows someone or has a friend in the trade.

Unfortunately it is not uncommon for independent schools to expect parents to cover the cost of any additional support. Particularly for SEND.

I would be inclined to ask for clarificaiton on what they believe this named therapist can deliver in terms of support. I would also ask that they, and you, keep a record of any observations of incidents and triggers etc. to try and build a clearer picture of what the apparent challenges are and how they can better support him. After all, he is only 5.

If you/they believe there may be SEN to consider, again, keeping a record will be of benefit. They should be applying the graduated approach of Assess, Plan, Do, Review (APDR) to support him. If an EHCP is applied fo rlater down the line, you'd need to demonstrate that the graduated approach had been followed.

There is a great support group called the SEN Parent Support Group on FB and via their website. There are lots of great (free) guides and resources that might help you navitage this with school, inclduign info on APDR, reasonable adjustments etc. https://www.facebook.com/groups/438202318539240

@Labraradabrador I take your point. It's very unfair that it's such a postcode lottery. At my school we would have done exactly what you've described above as was done for your children - I could have written it myself! I'm glad they're getting the support they need. One piece of work my school is part of is the development of send hub schools so that good practice is shared and supported in schools which are struggling with meeting send needs. Again that's only within our LA though (inner city London).

In my LA such support is entirely hypothetical. It exists to some extent somewhere, but never actually available to you or your child.

The first intervention for my dd who was later assessed as autistic was a speech and language therapist. They did an initial assessment including general observation and identified a couple of areas to work on (emotional regulation and some specific social communication areas) and ended up working with dd for 2 terms (one session per week) with some concrete objectives that ultimately we all agreed were achieved.

my ‘neurotypical’ dd has also had ELSA support (emotional literacy) when she was having a tough time in general - probably hormonal driven at its root, but the support gave her lots of techniques to help her self regulate in difficult situations. Again, it was time limited - one term of weekly sessions - with clear objectives and a positive outcome.

We didn’t pay extra for the Elsa, but did for the SALT as well as later ed psych and autism assessments.

@Labraradabrador I'm not sure what's hypothetical about what I've described.

You are wrong.

The 20 week timescale is set out in Regulation 13(2) of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014.

“A local authority must send the finalised EHC plan…as soon as practicable, and in any event within 20 weeks of the local authority receiving a request for an EHC needs assessment…”

The legal test for an EHCNA is set out in section 36(8) of the Children and Families Act 2014.

“The local authority must secure an EHC needs assessment for the child or young person if, after having regard to any views expressed and evidence submitted under subsection (7), the authority is of the opinion that
a) the child or young person has or may have special educational needs, and it may b) be necessary for special educational provision to be made for the child or young person in accordance with an EHC plan.”

9.14 of the SENCOP does list other things the LA should consider. However, the tests set out in section 36(8) of the CFA 2014 are the only lawful tests. Therefore the LA cannot lawfully refuse based on anything other than the legal tests. So, it wouldn’t be lawful to refuse just because the school has not compelled 1/2/3+ APDR cycles. It is one area the statutory guidance is not completely in line with the law. And case law established the SENCOP cannot overrule the law. IPSEA’s refusal to assess pack explains more about this discrepancy should you wish to read more.

Similarly, section 37 of the Children and Families Act 2014 sets out the legal threshold for an EHCP.

“Where, in the light of an EHC needs assessment, it is necessary for special educational provision to be made for a child or young person in accordance with an EHC plan
a) the local authority must secure that an EHC plan is prepared for the child or young person, and
b) once an EHC plan has been prepared, it must maintain the plan.”

And, like with looking at whether to assess or not, evidence from APDR cycles can be helpful evidence, but it wouldn’t be lawful for the LA to refuse just because there hasn’t been 1/2/3+ APDR cycles. It can even be possible to secure an EHCP if the school could do more but won’t.

Sorry, but it isnt really possible to ‘find excellent support’ for send children in the state sector for many many parents. Hop on any of the send boards and the vast majority of us are not getting close to what we need in state. It is only when the comparison with private comes up that we hear about all of the amazing support that is hypothetically available in the state sector.

@Labraradabrador sounds like you were incredibly unlucky then. As part of my job I visit many other local schools, and with three kids in state primaries I've visited/heard a lot as a parent too. Whilst send support obviously varies I can't say I've heard of many at all that offer as little as you describe. You've obviously found an 'indie' school which suits your child, but similarly many would not have. My point was that it is more than possible to find excellent support for children with or without ehcps within the state school system. Not everyone will have the resources for private schools and they shouldn't be made to feel the only way their child will be catered for is in the private school system, as it's untrue. The vast majority of the teachers I work with, and who have taught my children have been very 'in tune' with the needs of the children they teach, and most are passionate about educating children from all backgrounds.

“We do lots of playdates, birthday parties, afterschool clubs, etc. Every time I see him among other children I feel assured that his behaviour seems ok compared to peers if not better. I somtimes even feel a little proud of him not causing any trouble in what ended up a very chaotic situation. He often get praised by friends of ours for how easy to communicate with / how concentrate he is on his activities. And he has made quite a few friends in school who happily have playdates with him on weekends.”

Honestly, I wouldn’t worry. Good luck with whatever you decide, but he sounds like a happy little boy. My DC was quite ‘lively’ at that age but settled down in Y1 and is now 26 with no diagnoses whatsoever.

I must be wrong, then. My NASENCO tutors must be wrong. The Code of Practice must be wrong. Oh well.

Literally none of the primary schools near me have one tenth of what you describe and support isn’t generally available unless mandated via an EHCP (and even then not at all certain you will get what is in the plan).

I have found our indie teachers much much more tuned in to send and individual learning needs, and the kinds of support available much broader and readily available. some of the support costs extra and some is included.

the state primary we started in had 1 teacher and a part time ta for a class of 31, and largely relied on parent volunteers to keep things ticking. The sendco was shared between 3 schools, and only on site one day per week. They had intervention groups for students at risk of not passing SATs, but nothing for SEMH. It was an ‘outstanding’ school in a reasonably affluent / middle class community.

The timescale from agreement to assess is statutory and is an additional 20 weeks.

This is not correct. The 20 weeks timescale starts from the initial request for an EHCNA. It does not start from the agreement to assess.

APDR cycles are not part of the legal test for an EHCNA or EHCP. They can be helpful and form part of the picture. However, despite what some LAs claim, 1/2/3+ APDR cycles are not a legal pre-requisite to an EHCNA or EHCP. It is a myth some LAs like to perpetuate.

I would be careful not to pathologise what could be very developmentally normal behaviour, nor put pressure on a very small child to conform when he is not ready or able to as it could damage his relationship with school and learning for a long time. Being sent out of class (for what, with whom? How long? What does this achieve?) at this stage is a form of punishment and humiliation completely unsuitable for R aged children.
You could offer to pay for a TA to help manage his behaviour within the classroom but I'd be considering moving schools to somewhere a bit more accepting of normal developmental variance tbh.

I agree entirely with this.