EHCP support thread no. 4

Had response from caseworker yesterday who has agreed to the EHCP I wrote as ‘how I think the final should look’. Including my tables and re-adding all the original speech provision recommendations.

It’s going to -hopefully - signed off by her manager this week.

Thanks @BrightYellowTrain - I ended up using the wording “Qualified or working towards qualified teaching assistant with specific SEN training in supporting children with attention, listening, language and social interaction - with support from class teacher.” - for ‘who will deliver’. Perhaps still woolly but better than it was.

And then I discussed with DP about meeting with the school about ensuring DS’s speech targets are being covered, although DP said it’s so important, perhaps we should pay privately for it. I don’t know.

I honestly don’t think having it in Section F will make any difference with the school. They see me as a pain, and even (very unprofessionally IMO) told my SEN friend in the same class on Friday that I should be grateful that they agreed to take DS on.

I have a phone call later with an independent advice line for our county. I’ll see what they say.

@Namechangeagain80 communication is patchy, but LAs sometimes concede.

@Leftoverssandwich I hope the LA pulls their finger out.

I've just had a catch up with SENDIASS and she is so struck by the utter balls up of our EHCP so far she's going to get her manager to raise it with the Director of Education in the hope of some sort of 'loosening' of the situation. I have no idea what form this conversation will take and have precisely no hopes of it succeeding but given how many stories of things gone wrong that she hears, ours is clearly up there. We are only waiting for mediation to fail before launching our formal complaint in tandem with the appeal - a small part of me hopes that mediation gives them a way out of all this that they grab at but I know that's unlikely. Still.

@BrightYellowTrain Thanks, will do. Might as well try and keep them on their toes.

(Obviously they haven't missed the deadline yet, just thinking ahead... And realistically by the sounds of things 😅).

Also, there's lots of talk about "We strive to work with parents to effectively resolve appeals, where possible. We will continuously review the appeal and communicate with you (or your appointed representative) to discuss the concerns raised in the appeal and any possible resolutions."

Presumably this is rarely done? Have not heard a single thing from them so far aside from a standard email acknowledging the appeal.

You can inform SENDIST (although don’t do this at e.g. 12:05!) but they are mostly give the LA a further opportunity to comply and it is unlikely that will result in the LA being barred.

@BrightYellowTrain Like a parent constantly renegotiating with a child....

It's crazy how formal the schedule and information are for them to just be ignored.

I guess there's nothing to be done? Is it worth informing SENDIST? (As you say, they won't do anything!)

If the LA wasn’t going to name your preferred school, they wouldn’t necessarily ask you about other preferences.

Transport is possible. Once DD is compulsory school age, it is easier to enforce. Before DD becomes compulsory school age, things can be more difficult. There isn’t the same duty to provide transport, but they have the discretion to provide it and you can argue the provision of transport is necessary to facilitate DD’s attendance at the school named in section I of the EHCP.

Hi, I have only put one school down for my child’s ehcp draft, what would happen if the school proved they couldn’t accept her for some reason? Would the sen officer ask me to provide another school or would they find a school themselves? Also transport if she can’t go to my local school would the LA pay for her transport to school?

@Namechangeagain80 it isn’t uncommon for LAs to miss SENDIST deadlines. LAs are given repeated chances to comply. Just because SENDIST say they will be barred, doesn’t mean they are. They mostly aren’t. Even when they are, they are often reinstated.

@BrightYellowTrain Sorry, another question from me!!

I fully appreciate LAs are useless at keeping to most of the timescales - do they usually meet the deadline to submit their response to the appeal? Their deadline is this Friday.

I note that if they don't meet the deadline to submit the final tribunal bundle, they're barred from proceedings - are there any sanctions if they miss the earlier ones?

Thank you. I have just sent my earlier planned reply (and further email with extracts from the official minutes which I received this morning) as though I hadn't seen this reply.

She also blamed DD's lack of consistent arrival time for their inability to do any pre-teaching (identified as needed) as the year group TA is apparently ready to do this with DD at 8.45!

She said however that they could do this in a small group at the end of the day.

@Namechangeagain80 the SENCO shouldn’t be trying to quality control the report. It would be commonplace for the student social worker’s practice supervisor to have input/offer guidance, but the SENCO shouldn’t be requesting amendments based on what the school can or will provide. Having said that, for a refusal to assess appeal, you probably already have enough evidence to get over the threshold.

@BrightYellowTrain The SENCO replied before I had chance to send an official email about the meeting (or about academic support in general in which I was going to reference other discussion at the meeting):

"Regarding the amendments, it is my understanding that these were discussed during your meeting on Friday. One of the key changes was the wording of the adult support offered to X. As you are aware, XX is still in training, and while she has made commendable progress working with X and the other children, she is still in the process of learning and developing. This is the first time she has written such a plan, and ideally, it should have been reviewed and agreed upon by both myself and her off-site supervisor before being sent to you. However, in an effort to be proactive, XX forwarded it to you prematurely, for which I sincerely apologise."

Any thoughts?

@SpaceInvader321 Orders are rarely made on the day, and it may be more than 10 days…

Ah, I incorrectly assumed you had already got to the point of being able to complain to the ICO. Do that as soon as you are able and consider asking SENDIST to direct the LA to release anything particular you want.

Thanks @BrightYellowTrain for replying last week.

If the LA is ignoring you, complain to the ICO. If there is something specific you want, you could try asking SENDIST to direct them to release the information.

The ICO's website says to wait one month after the deadline before submitting a complaint. It is so frustrating how the LA are enabled to get away with this crap. I've been asking the LA for five months about our WDs and which schools they're consulting with. They've also had meetings with our SENCo that they refused to let us in on. There are only two months to go until our hearings, so this will be over soon but it is so stressful and my kids are still home with EBSA ... and I know when this battle is over, there will be the next one waiting.

Following the hearing, there will be a wait for the Order. SENDIST aims to send this with 10 working days. ... If SENDIST orders the content is amended, the LA has 5 weeks. If SENDIST only orders the placement is amended, the LA has 2 weeks. The LA may need chasing to finalise. Once the EHCP is finalised, unless stated otherwise, transition would begin then.

They will likely be amending B, F and I. Will we find out the decision on the day of the hearing, or will it be ten excruciating working days of waiting?

Thank you!

@246810k what has been agreed needs to be reflected in the latest version of the WD first.

Ready to sign consent order to halt final hearing but la have yet to underline our changes in working document? They said agreed to them but still bold?! Should this be changed before I sign? Thanks all!

Yes @BrightYellowTrain thank you. You are the voice of reason, and I need to hear what you are saying.

I will write today keeping what you’ve said in mind.

I think I need to stop myself playing an emotional blame game, and just get the lawful result - and lawfully this is the responsibility of the LA.

And yet the amended EHCP is still not finalised 8 months following the AR meeting.

Well, I’ve just had an email from his caseworker at 7pm on a Sunday evening.

She’s said write it, that’s no problem. She’ll check it. SENCO not linked in.

She says her manager is going to phone me tomorrow.

She said I’ve got her unwavering support.

She told me not to water anything down.

@RibbyJumper that’s too woolly. For example, what ‘SEN training’? 30 minutes as part of a whole school inset day 3 years ago about completely different needs to those DS has? Or something more? What does ‘supported by’ actually mean? Is the SALT provision further detailed, specified and quantified?

Funding isn’t related to what the school was providing or what they said they were providing. It is related to what is actually detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP.

@BrightYellowTrain

Thank you. ‘delivered by TA with SEN training, supported by the class teacher with reference to the speech therapist’s termly targets??’

So to my mind, the SENCO wanted to get 29hours of funding from the LA. So overstated what he was getting to secure that funding level?

@Phineyj

Little understanding, but also dismissive. Tiny, squeaky actually sounds slightly dehumanising to me, and it’s the use of the word ‘just’. ‘Just sits there’. SENCO has also described DS as extremely passive which I’ve had removed. I’m just trying to imagine writing a report that says ‘this child has a tiny, squeaky voice and just sits there’.

The fact that you’ve stated ‘I don’t quite understand’ or ‘appears not have listened, but has learnt’ shows that empathy that teachers need. You are prepared to admit that you don’t know, and the child has learnt in their own unique way. You are valuing the child.

@RibbyJumper provision in EHCPs should be based on what is reasonably required to meet the needs in B (which should include all special educational needs). It should not be watered down based on funding, what the school wants to or can provide, or what a SENCO thinks is achievable to secure.

Although I don’t think the person who is doing most of his support is qualified…Rather than the very qualified SENCO

This is what I mean. Qualified in what? Having QTS (and the NASENCO/NPQSENCO if they aren’t still working towards it), which is what I think you are meaning by ‘qualified’, doesn’t always make someone the appropriate person to deliver the SEP in F. And ‘qualified’ alone could mean qualified in anything including irrelevant areas such as being a qualified electrician.

The recent emails are another way of stringing you along. The latest in a long line of delaying tactics and excuses. At the end of January, “The LA said they’d have the finalised EHCP to be this week, and the reason for the delay was phase transfers.” It is excuse after excuse. You can see why it is a successful strategy from the LA’s PoV. Whether the SENCO is copied in or not is irrelevant. The wording in the EHCP isn’t based on what the SENCO wants or doesn’t want amended because of what they want/don’t want to deliver or what they don’t think is achievable.