EHCP support thread no. 4

@MinnieTruck this isn’t about DS’s epilepsy. This is, as you say, about money. Amending to include DS’s epilepsy alone won’t increase funding if the rest of the EHCP is already correctly written. The LA is responsible for ensuring the provision in F is received and includes ensuring there is appropriate funding. If this is a maintained nursery school, they can be named even if they object. If the SS admits DS’s age group, I think that would be an excellent idea, IMO.

The provision in F should be enough to be able to support DS appropriately alongside the IHCP because even disregarding his epilepsy DS is going to need 1:1 in F.

@BrightYellowTrain exactly. So why is this nursery determined to carry on making my life hell, I don’t understand. Well actually, I do. It’s all about money.

The SENCO has basically said that the level of funding that’s been offered isn’t in line with what they expect. They’re hoping that once DS’ Epilepsy is mentioned in more detail then they can ask the LA for a higher level of funding. I might pushback on the nursery via email about this actually. If anything, I may also ask the LA to name the SS that DD will be going to next year as DS would eventually go there anyway. I’m not sure what to do!

This nursery is a LA funded nursery school which I think is maintained?

@MinnieTruck the information about DS’s epilepsy in relation to both his educational and health needs should be in the EHCP. However, the nursery shouldn’t be using the vague nature of the EHCP to refuse a place. The provision in F should be enough to be able to support DS appropriately alongside the IHCP because even disregarding his epilepsy DS is going to need 1:1 in F.

Remind me, is the nursery maintained or a non-maintained early years setting?

Remind me, is the nursery maintained or a non-maintained early years setting?

@BrightYellowTrain the only thing with the IHP is that the nursery won’t take DS as they don’t feel the EHCP fully represents his needs (which it doesn’t). So the concept of the IHP makes sense but how can I get that in place if I can’t get the bloody nursery named? Honestly I feel as if I’m gonna go mad

Will they take the information given and possibly write a third or just say, ‘tough, this is what you’re getting.’

@MinnieTruck it could be either.

You have the draft. You comment on it. The LA then doesn’t have to issue a draft again unless they propose to amend based on something other than your representations (and naming the placement).

Sometimes LAs will stick to this. Sometimes they will issue draft after draft because it delays finalising and thus delays their responsibilities.

After you have made comments on the draft, if LA refuses to make the necessary amendments, don’t let them drag it out for months. Push them to finalise and appeal. Although you can still request the necessary amendments and remain in discussion with the LA.

The LA doesn’t have to amend again. They could refuse. How to deal with a seizure would typically be in an Individual Healthcare Plan (IHP or IHCP) even if some of it is also mentioned in the EHCP.

Thank you @Ponche. I think it’s pretty rude that they give you an opportunity to make comments just for them to ignore the comments anyway!

@BrightYellowTrain I’ve read your post 4 times and I’m still confused. Please dumb it down for me🫣

For example, the LA have issued the first draft for DS’ plan. It’s a mess and missing a crucial bit of context because Neurology didn’t get to contribute towards the EHCNA. The nursery that I’ve requested have gone back to the LA and have said that they’re unable to make a decision (so basically a no) until the relevant information is added.

I’ve emailed DS’ Epilepsy Nurse who will be sending me a seizure plan by the end of the week. This is what she would have submitted for the EHCNA as well as DS’ latest clinical report. Now, my question is, what happens if the LA write a second draft before I receive the seizure plan? Will they take the information given and possibly write a third or just say, ‘tough, this is what you’re getting.’

Second question, can they refuse to include the seizure plan into the EHCP? How can I make sure that this evidence is included because, funding aside, it’s really important for the nursery to know what to do in an event of a seizure. Help😅

@MinnieTruck there isn’t a maximum. Sometimes LAs will issue numerous drafts delaying finalising for months on end. Sometimes they will only issue one.

After issuing the original draft and giving you time to make representations, there is no further requirement for the LA to issue another draft if they aren't going to make any amendments or the amendments made are a result of your representations. They could finalise without consulting you again.

If the LA is refuse to amend when you make representations on the draft, it can be wise to push the LA to finalise rather than get drawn into a prolonged back and forth with the LA where the LA still doesn’t amend to a satisfactory standard.

Although that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t check and cross reference the reports/evidence/EHCP, and it does not mean you shouldn’t highlight and explain what amendments are needed. Neither does it mean not still trying to work with the LA to settle the outstanding disputes or collating more evidence.

What it does mean is months and months aren’t wasted without any provision and without submitting an appeal. If the LA drags out finalising an initial EHCP, the provision in the draft does not legally have to be provided. It isn’t finalised. And often where LAs get involved in a protracted back and forth, an appeal is still needed. Going back and forth delays you submitting an appeal for the time going back and forth because you can’t submit an appeal without the right of appeal, which you get on finalisation. This could easily be 6 months or even over a year (18 months in one case I saw) and then you still have to wait for a hearing as normal.

What’s the maximum amount of drafts that the LA will create before they say, ‘okay this is the final draft. If you don’t agree, appeal?’

Don’t spend ages agonising over section A. It is more important to focus on B&F.

How much attention do we think LAs pay to Section A? I'm assuming almost none and it's just a 'parent voice' device?

Wondering how much to agonise over it...

Ha ha love an access arrangement document. I definitely think breaks would be needed, it's a long time.

I'm not actually sure the EP meant e.g. no exams, looking at it in context I think meant things like regular spelling, vocabulary, maths tests could be done but not timed for her in order to keep the burden lower. I don't actually want to opt her out of SATS; the school she's in is obsessed with SATS and it's basically all they do in year 6. But she doesn't seem stressed about it or even care at all so I'm happy for her to sit with the rest of the class with arrangements in place.

I have refused extra lessons for her to bump her up a grade boundary which the class teacher is totally supportive of (but I know is getting grief from the head about).

An ideal arrangement would be extra time and a prompter. She's actually got a couple of banding tests coming up with 25% extra time so will see if she gets anywhere near finishing those as well. If not we can up to a 50% request.

She had 50% extra time but no rest breaks. In hindsight, we should have pushed for breaks and she was exhausted - particularly when she had two exams on one day. I have educated myself since as others have said and read the jcq access arrangements document at great depth. I am now much better prepared for dd2 🙂
At university, she started on 25% extra time. We fought and she got 50% eventually. Then we fought for rest breaks as they said she couldn't have both - which is ridiculous for a 3hr exam which becomes 4.5hrs. She now has rest breaks, 50% extra time and an individual room so she can eat / drink as well as she was struggling with the amount of time without food.

While I understand the ed psych's position regarding no timed assessments, I have never heard of that happening at GCSE so I would start looking at it now! I also agree with others that if you can get primary to agree to extra time, secondaries will take it as normal way of working and it should be in place from day 1. Much easier to do now than fight for later.

If your child is currently yr6, lots could change by the time you are looking at GCSE but worth looking at the current sustem as secondaries will base ks3 on this. Access arrangements for GCSE can be found here:

www.jcq.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/JCQ-AARA-24-25_FINAL_accessible.pdf

(If you need something to help you sleep or while.away the hours! 🙂)

@Macramepotholder if the EP thinks DD should be disapplied from KS2 SATs, you might want to read the guidance here before speaking to the HT.

Even though DD is only Y6, it is worth reading JCQ’s guidance too because secondary schools often base access arrangements for younger years on JCQ’s guidance. It helps to build a picture of it being the pupil’s normal way of working.

50% extra time doesn’t automatically mean the candidate is eligible for rest breaks. If they are also eligible for rest breaks, they don’t have to only be half way through.

DS1 has 50% extra time, rest breaks and a whole host of other exam access arrangements. DS3 has 25%, rest breaks and a few other exam access arrangements. Both also have home invigilation. DS2 has 25% extra time, rest breaks and use of word processor. DD2 had 25% extra time.

@handmademitlove wow, 50%! Did you find she got tired or did she get a break halfway through?

DD has SATs this year (which I don't care about and neither does she) otherwise we've got a long time before 'proper' exams, but one of the EP suggestions is that she doesn't do timed assessments at all.

@BrightYellowTrain no need to apologise at all! The EP also suggested she was using a few different strategies to get around it which on the one hand is good, but on the other hand must be knackering for her.

Apologies @Macramepotholder. I completely missed that in your pp. I should have read more carefully. It does sound like the excellent memory is helping to mask other difficulties.

@Macramepotholder DD1 has a similar spiky profile - I remember the Sendco calling me to say that they thought something had gone wrong with the testing as it suggested that she had the processing speed of a pre-schooler at age16 - but that couldn't possibly be right as she had taught her and she got a 9 at gcse......

Needless to say, after more investigation, she did indeed have very poor processing speed that had been masked by her very high academic ability and coping strategies. She ended up having 50% extra time in exams and even then, she sometimes runs out of time. Make sure you push for this if needed - our Sendco had never done an application for 50% and had never seen it in place for A-levels, but we got there in the end!

Working memory was the one that was at 93% - her fluid reasoning was very poor as well, only 4%.

I sat in on a bit of the SLT assessment and she told DD no one had ever managed to repeat a string of numbers that long so...I actually think that's a good part of how she gets by at school. Just excellent at remembering stuff.

It does show how important it is, doesn't it? I suspected she was very spiky but not completely opposite ends of the scale. Hopefully more grist to my mill for actually issuing the ehcp.

@Macramepotholder what is DD’s working memory like? DS3 has a very spiky profile. Prior to testing, everyone thought he had an excellent memory. He does have an excellent long-term memory which masked a very poor working memory.

@Phineyj such a range in a spiky profile actually isn’t that uncommon in DC with EHCPs. It is why cognitive testing is so important, despite what some LAs/LA EPs say.

Got our EP assessment back today and DD has such wildly spiky scores- I'm so glad the tribunal ordered a full cognitive assessment. 96% verbal comp, 93% working memory and then 5% processing speed and 7% viso-spatial. Very weird as the slow processing usually goes hand in hand with poor memory (we knew her memory is excellent, it's a family joke that you can't tell her anything as she files it away for future use). She's recommended lots of 121 and small group intervention within a mainstream setting. It's a good report, very quantified.

Also saw the SLT this week who confirmed a lot of similar and who thinks she definitely needs mainstream with support and that none of the local specials or asd units could meet need as they won't offer enough academics. So we just need to find a mainstream that will go for it...

@SpaceInvader321 the LA can consult with other placements but they don’t have to and are unlikely to consult with SS outside of the review/tribunal processes because it will cost them money. There is no incentive for them to. That’s why I posted unlikely rather than can’t. They would then need to go through the review process/proceed as if amendments proposed after a review to amend the placement anyway or amend via the appeal process.

The online school you were looking at wouldn’t be named in section I, so wouldn’t be consulted in the same way.

There may be appeals pending for the wholly independent and they are waiting to see which ones are successful. Some wholly independent are struggling with the length of time appeals are taking, which is why some are giving POP forms with a date they will hold the place until.