Daughter refused Sen school so upset

If they send a consultation out to a school, they have deemed that school suitable.

This is not always the case.

and if parents agree to it

Not quite. LAs must consult parents and parents cannot be forced to organise, deliver or facilitate provision, that includes they can’t forced to allow access to their home, but LAs can, if the legal threshold is met, arrange EOTAS/EOTIS even if the parents object. They are unlikely to, especially if parents pursue a proper package, but it can happen.

LAs make the decision based on costings. If they send a consultation out to a school, they have deemed that school suitable. The school can then decide whether or not they can meet need. The LA would not waste the Head and SENCO's time otherwise, as this would not bode well.

@DrRuthGalloway the right of appeal following the annual review is time limited.

Personally, I wouldn’t bother formally requesting a reassessment of needs. There is no guarantee that will lead to the LA making a different decision and it potentially just wastes time. The OP has time to lose. If the LA is going to concede, they can do that without a reassessment of needs. OP should appeal and seek an independent assessment as part of that.

Oh yes, I missed the non bit. Apologies!

Also not entirely correct. Parents can name a parental preference school and the LA MUST consult with them.

@everychildmatters LAs make the decision. They can only offer eotas if no school is suitable (and if parents agree to it) see section 61 of the Child and Families Act 2014. Sometimes (well 99% of the time for those who appeal!) the decisions aren't made lawfully, in which case if challenged via Tribunal, Tribunal will make a decision on what's required/suitable.

@HollyBerryz in that post, I think that poster was meaning that wholly independent schools (which given their earlier posts is what I think they mean by non-section 41 schools, even though many non-section 41 schools are not wholly independent) cannot be named against their will. You need an offer of a place. So the school gets to decide if they think they are suitable (even though that’s not what Everychildmatters was asking. She was asking about EOTAS/EOTIS and inappropriate).

How will she run out of time? There isn't a new EHCP, that's the whole problem. She needs new advice to support writing of a new EHCP which will actually meet her child's needs.

Asking for new EP advice first is not poor advice.

If the LA refuses and tries to issue a new EHCP (without seeking new EP advice) that names this mainstream she can appeal.

I do not work in statutory assessment for an LA, but I am a highly experienced EP and I know that my colleagues and myself do this kind of work as bread and butter casework under reassessment of ehcps day in day out and if assigned to me this case would be quickly sorted with updated advice and no need for parent to go to the expense and stress of tribunal to achieve that. If the LA is unhelpful re new EP advice, then threaten to appeal a new EHCP. What does the OP have to lose? I am not fobbing her off. It's my genuine opinion. She should have had fresh EP advice after year 5 review.

I have explained the types of cases that LAs try their luck in court on.
32 percent of registered appeals are conceded or withdrawn before they get to court.

In a non-section 41, the Head and SENCo upon receipt of a consultation from the LA. Based on section F of the EHCP, amongst other things. The real question ought to be 'who writes the EHCPs and although they're evidence-based, following an EP report etc, are they familiar with that particular setting and what that child's needs would be in that setting?'. Therein lies the rub.

No. LA's make the decision. See section 39 of the children and Families Act 2014. Schools must be consulted and can give a view, ultimately the decision is the LAs. Hence why when an appeal is lodged, the appeal is against LA decision and not the school.

Prior to that it would be the LA, who decide which schools to send consultations out to, based on their own knowledge of various settings and the success of previous SEN students in those settings

@Midsummernightsdreaming, you have misunderstood @everychildmatters. She wasn’t talking about schools, regardless of whether they are academies, maintained, free, wholly independent, section 41 independent… she was talking about EOTAS/EOTIS.

But, again, provision in EHCPs is not written to fit the setting.

@Midsummernightsdreaming I see - thank you. The majority of the children I work with as an EOTAS Tutor have either never been in a school setting or have not been in one for a number of years so it wouldn't be the Head or SENDCO?

In a non-section 41, the Head and SENCo upon receipt of a consultation from the LA. Based on section F of the EHCP, amongst other things. The real question ought to be 'who writes the EHCPs and although they're evidence-based, following an EP report etc, are they familiar with that particular setting and what that child's needs would be in that setting?'. Therein lies the rub.

If it is inappropriate for the SEP to be made in a school, the answer isn’t remove the provision the child legally reasonably requires in order to shoehorn the child into a setting. There are other options such as EOTAS/EOTIS.

@everychildmatters if the parent appeals, SENDIST decide if it is inappropriate for provision to be made in a school (or post 16 institution where that is relevant).

@StrivingForSleep Who makes the decision re a school setting not being suitable?

No, it's the difference between a suitable or unsuitable school.

They wouldn't advise it otherwise? Of course they will. They want to remove specific provision to save money.

How can anyone possibly know what to remove at an AR if no one even knows where the child is going next?

Why would you remove provision the child NEEDs?

Why are you removing provision with no evidence it's no longer needed?

It's unlawful and this washy washy type of LA nonsense doesn't wash on mumsnet I'm afraid.

My LA tried to remove 1:3 adult ratios in our last appeal. The judge asked why, they had no reason to actually offer cost cutting doesn't wash in Tribunal. Tribunal kept it in because they know LA excuses are exactly that, excuses to dodge appropriate funding to meet needs.

Of course there are other reasons why LAs attempt to remove provision. It completely ignores that LAs like to try to water down provision and remove provision for completely unlawful reasons such as funding. Any parent whose LA attempts to unlawfully remove provision e.g. where it has been recently ordered by SENDIST should pursue legal action.

@everychildmatters EOTAS/EOTIS is only legally possible if it is inappropriate for provision to be made in a school. That doesn’t just include MS. To get a comprehensive package is also likely to take an appeal.

Not sure how it all works in detail from a parental pov and EHCP, but I'm an EOTAS Tutor and have lots of children on my waiting list.
Has this ever been an option for your daughter?
I teach my students from their homes in the main. 1:1.

@HollyBerryz yes in an ideal world and with an abundance of choice of settings. Unfortunately not currently the case for many...

All of this!

Also do not follow this poor advice

You actually don't need to move straight to tribunal. You already have an EHCP you are requesting an updated Ed psych assessment as her needs have significantly changed. Do that first because if they agree to that it could save a lot of time, effort and bother. Or employ your own EP.

You have a set time in which to appeal. If you do this /\ /\ you'll run out of time. Do you work for a LA @DrRuthGalloway ? Sounds like the rubbish advice they give out to stop parents enforcing their children's legal rights.
^
Also if LAs don't persevere with cases they know they'll lose, how come they lose 98/99% of them at SENDIST?^

*say the 'can' meet need!

If that's the difference between a suitable school saying they can meet need (and otherwise can) or saying they can't then it's worth looking at. The LAs know this, which is why they advise schools to hold an emergency AR asap and have the irrelevant information removed from section F in order for them to be able to say they can't meet need. They wouldn't advise this otherwise. If SEN parents are unaware of this and are frustrated that a particular school is refusing to be named, then it's not a moot point. For the OP perhaps in this instance, but for other SEN parents reading this thread, they need to be aware.

You don't have to agree or disagree to the EHCP or setting named in section I in order to appeal.

Provision should be written to meet the child's needs, not to suit the setting.

They do this in the hope you give up. Get an appeal in. If you're entitled to legal aid they can help you.