Where does law stand on how behind a child has to be to trigger Educational Phycologist

[Childlaw2014]

My dd is one of the eldest in year 2.

Didn't have her alphabet, (tutor over half term sorted that out)

Is on level 5 Oxford Reading and is a comfortable level 5. Gets between 0 and 3 in spelling test. I've not been told by the school but she goes down to year 1 for maths, has extra phonics.

The tutor I saw recommend testing for auditory processing and dyslexia. She said was /saw getting mixed up and some other signs.

The doctor said '' I don't know how to request that ask the school '' today we met with the teacher who said..

We don't test for dyslexia here.

I asked about triggering educational psychologist, and teacher said dd isn't bad enough. She said... If she was reception level but she's breaking through year 1.

So what is behind in law terms to trigger Ep who then triggers... Ap tests and dyslexia tests. Thank you

You can get a student loan or career development loan for the MSc. You could do it part time and work part time.

The EP training route is funded through a tax free bursary - currently about £16k outside of London, a bit more inside. Some Year 2/3 trainees work as employees, not on the bursary, but this is rather unusual. You typically get your day to day mileage paid for as well.

whereas my contention is that LAs have a good case to expect, as part of its "best endeavours", that a school has employed the services of an EP.

I find it very difficult to believe that the SEN division of any LA does not know schools, especially the ones who have more than their fair share of SEN children (because they don't make it clear to parents at the outset that SEN children are unwelcome there), are under such budget pressure, they cannot afford to buy in private ed psy to do assessments on all children, who may have SEN?

I have heard time and time again from parents here, that they asked for their child to see an ed psy, and the school said something along these lines of:

"We get an ed psy one day a term, they can see 2 - 3 children, and we have 16 children already on the waiting list before your child....".

Even then there is no guarantee, some child with challenging behaviour won't come along, who the school sees as a higher priority, pushing DC further down the list?

Following with interest, thanks for posting

But Beveren you are ignoring the "best endeavours" clause....and suggesting that LAs are only requesting EP reports as part of submission "in order to" force the cost onto schools; whereas my contention is that LAs have a good case to expect, as part of its "best endeavours", that a school has employed the services of an EP.

No, I'm not. You really seem to be repeatedly misreading my posts. I've acknowledged that schools often buy in EP time, and manifestly that's not just for children who might qualify for EHCPs. The point is that LAs simply cannot by law make it a condition of agreeing to an EHC needs assessment that the school should have got an EP involved first. It builds in unnecessary delay, and it's expressly contrary to the legal criteria for assessment which are solely that the child has or might have SEN, and might need provision through an EHCP.

Also, as an EP- assuming what we do is considered useful - getting called in after a statutory assessment has been agreed is extremely frustrating. We then have 6 weeks to meet the child, assess, meet the family, and write a report and it prevents us from offering any kind of extended input over time or a proper opportunity to formulate or work to the plan-do-review method we are supposed to. Real effective EP intervention doesn't happen in these one off meeting for the purposes of completing statutory assessment.

But what is to stop an EP doing this as well as the assessment? If, as I suspect, it is that their LA employer won't let them, then your beef is with the LA, not the school.

what is to stop an EP doing this as well as the assessment?

A combination of things.

School budgets, meaning that ongoing input isn’t affordable.

A misunderstanding of the EP role and what EPs can do that isn’t assessment (consultation, staff training, delivering therapy, working to design school policies)

Resistant SENCos who take the attitude of “the school pays you so the school can decide how you should practise and all we want is assessment after assessment”

But what is to stop an EP doing this as well as the assessment? If, as I suspect, it is that their LA employer won't let them, then your beef is with the LA, not the school.

Beveren
You cannot offer psychological input over time when you are constrained to a 6 week statutory advice timetable for a child you have not previously seen.

Most of my children who progress to EHCP I will have had involvement over time and supported their schools to have a better understanding of their needs, worked with young person on self esteem or metacognition or whatever. The family and I will have met several times.

My employer, for such cases, incidentally, is the school as a proxy for the family. In my area EPs are fully commissioned by schools and not directly employed by the LA.

"But what is to stop an EP doing this as well as the assessment? If, as I suspect, it is that their LA employer won't let them, then your beef is with the LA, not the school"

Um, because there are so many ehc assessments to do that there is no time to see the other kids, kids who incidentally often have much greater needs than some of the kids I am doing ehc assessments for.

As another EP, I can only echo what @strawberrytea123 @AzerByeBye and @MbwaKidogo have already said.

Yes, there is a real problem at the moment with a shortage of EPs, however with the increased funding for training things look set to improve over the next few years in England at least.

The drive towards issuing EHCPs is part of the difficulty. Inclusive education systems is the answer, and this is where EPs really come into their own.

Also to address your question OP - the school calls in an EP when they feel they require outside input to meet the child's needs. It doesn't (or shouldn't) have anything directly to do with how 'behind' the child is, it's more to do with the skills, expertise and provision the school already have to offer.

In the case of your daughter, I would suggest looking at progress over time - if she is progressing, then there is no real cause for concern. She will get there eventually. If she is not progressing it's worth discussing with the SENCO what additional things can be done to help her to progress. A diagnosis will not help her to progress in and of itself, it's better to look at what the school can put in place to support her. If all possible support has been in place for some time and she continues not to progress, then it might be time to call in the EP to help explore what other things could be tried. Regular monitoring of progress is important in order for the school to recognise if/when this point has been reached.

You cannot offer psychological input over time when you are constrained to a 6 week statutory advice timetable for a child you have not previously seen.

But you can do the assessment and then carry on with psychological input. Unless, of course, you are prevented by LA or school funding from doing so.

But, yet again, the point is that the LA cannot by law make it a condition of considering a request for an EHC needs assessment that the child should already have been assessed by an EP.

because there are so many ehc assessments to do that there is no time to see the other kids, kids who incidentally often have much greater needs than some of the kids I am doing ehc assessments for.

I would hope that those children with "much greater needs" are also put forward for assessment, @neolara, whether by you, their schools or otherwise - if they need EP input that they are not getting, on the face of it they more than satisfy the criteria for issuing an EHCP.

beveren you can only carry on with pay hological input over time after statutory assessment if that is part of the ehcp, which is exceptionally rare, and as we don't offer "therapy" in the same way as a speech therapist, say, any mention of EP involvement tends to be restricted to reviewing. We are usually involved in "assessment-and-problem-solving," and the point of an EHCP is that needs are known and enumerated as a result of that process.
We do often get called back in where the provision in an EHCP turns out not to solve the issues, but that is different.

@Beveren it would be great if only children with high level of needs are assessed for the ehcp but if an assessment is agreed we have to do it- I've done assessments where the need has been very low but parents have appealed decisions and fought for the assessment so it is then done to ensure they the LA fully understands the need.

It is their right to appeal if they don't like a decision but it does take time assessing students who don't have high levels of need and we can't prioritise their order as the assessments get allocated to us in the order they are decided by the panels and Sen team and once we get given the details of assessment our six week time starts

In my area psychological work has to be paid for by the school. Some are fantastic at using time for this but others don't like to use a huge chunk of their time on one student-so all I can do is make a recommendation but they don't have to follow

@MbwaKidogo, if you believe ongoing psychological input is needed, don't you recommend it in your assessment reports?

@strawberrytea, I wasn't suggesting that only children "high levels of need" should be assessed - I said that they should also be assessed if that wasn't happening. The law says that children must be assessed if they may have SEN and may need support through an EHCP, and that makes sense: often schools don't really understand what the difficulties are, and indeed in many cases are in denial about the reality, until an assessment has taken place.

Hi OP. It doesn't matter what the law says in the short run (although I salute the people who lobby). What matters is the practical steps you can take. I do find it about concerning that the school hasn't communicated with you. My DD is also year 2 and a little behind on literacy, although in a normal range as far as I know. She was referred to a fine motor skills club run by the SENCO in year 1 and school have responded to our requests for meetings including one with the head about how to manage holiday literacy homework (which has caused some massive meltdowns). It is a private school so more resources but in the other hand, very academic so I've been quite impressed by their calm and positive approach - as at this rate DD is going to mess up their SATS scores!

Get informed, decide what you are able to do/spend for most impact and do that. If there is more than one year 3 teacher, it might be one of them would suit her more than another, for instance. The right teacher can make such a huge difference.

I mean, look ahead and think about where you would want to be in year 3. The head at DD's school said that by age 8 it's worth starting to think about the secondary transition and what might suit the child.

beveren
You are not, I don't think, an EP. I don't think you have a full understanding of our work.
We do not offer a therapeutic service of direct support to CYP in the same way as clinical psychs, speech therapists or OT. We assess needs and make recommendations on how to ameliorate those needs and are a consulting service to school. Why would a psychologist recommend as part of an EHCP advice that the child needs to continue the plan-do-review process with the EP's oversight. The point is that process is usually part of fully understanding the child's needs in order to meet them. The ehcp is meant to meet them too.
Very occasionally I will recommend an EP be invited to early review but there is no way we would be doing our assess-plan-do-review cycling AFTER EHCP as a matter of course. We may recommend a training session or something but not sustained EP input after ehcp.
It's the wrong time to do it. Trust me on that; I know my job. We are MUCH better placed working with YP before submission for EHCP takes place, in almost all circumstances. We are also useful troubleshooters AFTER EHCP where it hasn't worked; this usually results in the ehcp being rewritten to reflect updated advice. We are not written in to ehcps. You simply wouldn't have "EP visit weekly" or whatever in the arrangements. It's not what we do.

@Beveren sorry I think I have misunderstood you

As @MbwaKidogo says, we don't have the capacity to work in a long term basis unless time is specifically allocated or purchased. Probably 50% of my time is used on ehcp assessments and tribunal work, then the rest is divided up between schools so they don't get much

If there were a lot of EPs then we could definitely recommend ongoing work- some members of my team are very highly trained and we do all enjoy the longer term work

I suppose what we couldn't do is recommend specifically an ep do the work as others might be trained as well.... for example CBT- the school may have their own links with someone trained and should have the freedom of choice to use them if they wish

It is a mess at the moment I think, I agree it isn't the best but it is probably the best in the context at the moment

Great post @MbwaKidogo 👏🏻

MbwaKidogo, my work involves regularly working with EPs and other education professionals and seeing reports from a very wide range of EPs. I'm also familiar with HCPC requirements and British Psychological Society guidance. If an EP really believes that what a child needs is more assess-plan-do-review with EP oversight, then as a matter of professional ethics that is what should go into the assessment report. Sure, it may be that that is only a preliminary step in understanding the child's needs, but that can be made clear. If the EP believes that, because of that, the child doesn't yet need an EHCP, no doubt they will say so. But it's not a reason to refuse to accept a formal request for an EHC needs assessment that someone hasn't been through that exercise already, particularly as a blanket policy. I've certainly seen reports from highly reputable and experienced EPs advising that, for instance, an EP should continue to have input and oversight, or even that children should be placed in specialist schools that have a good level of access to EP advice.

I do think that, as with lots of occupations, it is vital not to fall into the trap of thinking that the fact that your department works in one particular way means that no alternative is possible or desirable.

And, again, this is coming off the point, which is that it is unlawful for any local authority to make acceptance of a request for assessment or a decision whether to assess conditional on a school having already received EP advice. Obviously no-one is saying that schools shouldn't get such advice way before they they consider an EHCP referral, but you can't delay a child getting help they need by putting artificial barriers in the way.

Incidentally I do 1:1 therapeutic work with the children in my schools. I am in Wales where services aren’t traded, so maybe that’s why it’s different, but where I have capacity, I can offer it.
It would never ever be written into an EHCP though. EPs facillitate change, we are not part of any child’s ongoing provision. There just aren’t enough of us, plus we exist to enable children’s needs to be met by settings, not personally plug gaps.

I don't think it should be a blanket policy that an EP report MUST be provided before a local authority agrees to ehcp.

However, I do think there should be a good reason why not, if not (eg, parental request).

Earlier, you were saying the only reason LAs want them is to palm off the costs to schools (even though, where local authorities fund the EP service, this is nonsensical as the LA is paying anyway). I am respectfully disagreeing and saying that educational psychology is less effective if constrained to a rapid-turn-around assessment in order to meet statutory assessment timescales. I don't disagree that it should not be a blanket policy that all requests for assessment must have EP (as you say, blanket policies of this type are illegal). I do disagree as to your judgement on why EPs work before statutory assessment (ie solely in order to save the LA money by getting the school to pay for us). I disagree because a) best endeavours gives school this duty in all but fairly exceptional cases and b) we are bloody useful in this situation. Much more useful than rubber stamping an assessment for EHCP.

EPs facillitate change, we are not part of any child’s ongoing provision. There just aren’t enough of us, plus we exist to enable children’s needs to be met by settings, not personally plug gaps.

Yes, I think there is a slight misunderstanding of the EP role by some on here, as already identified previously. EPs are not like speech therapists or physios. You don't refer to them to get ongoing intervention and input in a clinic.

The focus on facilitating the school environment to change means that in some cases the EP doesn't even see the child as strategies can be identified in consultation that can then be put in place.

Hope OP is better informed. Sounded like she was being passed from pillar to post, no one wanting to help her.

I had the same! Till I came to MN and the SN boards sorted me right out and I got a strategy for dealing with all the different agencies/aspects.

Hope you get it sorted OP. You have to fight! Hard! Good luck.