To wonder how a £36k a year education can meet DS’s needs if a £250k one can’t?

[GoneBatty]

Private residential SEND college (out of area) costs £250k a year. They are saying DS’s needs are too high for them to manage.

Council are saying a £36k a year local outreach provision can meet his needs.

It’s all very fishy as SEND college at first said they felt they could meet DS’s needs so we visited, all was OK. As as soon as the council (who will have to fund it) got involved, college backtracked and said they couldn’t meet his needs.

They have given nonsensical reasons which I have mitigated numerous times. Both the college and council have told blatant lies and I’ve caught them out in two big ones!

Now we have reached Tribunal the college is suddenly full which was not an issue a few months ago so know they’re lying again as they would know numbers of students months in advance due to Tribunals and the time it take to get funding. Also most Tribunals due to take place over the summer were postponed for this age group.

AIBU to suspect the council has given the college a backhander to say they can’t meet his needs? It would cost council £750k for a 3 year program. They could have given a £100k ‘investment’ per se? Still saves a lot of money!

There is literally no other provision like this in the country. I have approached 21 other colleges, local and out of area. DS has had no proper provision for over a year and he is running out of time as age 20 - EHCP is to 25.

Do I sound nuts (I feel it)? Can this actually be possible?

Further Education is free up to the age of 21. Should the fact that someone needs support to access FE mean that they aren't entitled to it?

It's not a question of priority or what you think shouldn't happen. The law correctly recognises that young people with SEND are likely to need education support well beyond the age of 18 and that they must have it. If the council can find a placement able to give the required support at under £750K then of course that is where OP's son should go. The problem here is that they haven't.

@Lizthelettuce you realise that 95% of tribunals go in the parents favour? Which means that 95% of the time, local authorities are not making adequate provisions for these children. A tribunal won't agree to a more expensive option unless it is needed.

They do when they are disabled enough to require an EHCP. It is a reasonable adjustment on the basis those with severe SEND require longer to complete their education up to and including level 3. Even the government recognise that.

"Placement around £100k a year are usually for those with extreme needs that need up to 2 or 3 staff for one patient, usually due to violent behaviour."

A residential placement for my son who would need 3:1 would be 3 times that. Social care wouldn't be prepared to fund that much if there was a cheaper option.

I imagine what might have happened is that the LA tried to negotiate downwards the staffing provision, probably the nighttime staffing provision. I'm imagining a scenario where it might have been suggested by your lawyer, or an expert, that your child will need, for the sake of argument, 2:1 support at day and in the night as well. The LA might have said, that's ridiculous because you have other staff around who can come and help in an emergency, and discussion has reached an impasse. The school would be saying that they can't meet your child's needs ( safely and to their satisfaction) on the funding being proposed.

Theoretically, lots of methods are less expensive than round the clock residential provision - but effective. They would not necessarily be less appropriate, if the care was responsive and the staff ratio could be increased at times of emergency and if professional services would be involved to give support and guidance. But I don't know the situation, obviously, so this is just speculating.

I can't understand why the cost is so high. The OP says her son isn't violent, is polite and well behaved, was in mainstream school and didn't have an ECHP until he was 15. And yet 20 colleges have turned him down saying his needs are too high.

It doesn't make sense to me

Everyone in England can access further education without charge up to the age of 19, and for the vast majority of non-disabled children or children without SEN, that is all they need. The point is, of course, that many, many children with SEN will need more time to reach the point of being able to access FE. Do you think it's acceptable to say to them "Sorry, you were too slow, no FE for you"?

I do not understand why some people believe it is ok for £750k to be spent on one person. There isn’t an endless pot. That £750k has to come from somewhere and it will be to the detriment of many other people.

DS1 has an EOTAS package costing well over £100k. He isn’t violent and it doesn’t include any boarding provision. £250k for an EHCP including residential isn’t unheard of. The majority at independent specialist placements are funded by LAs.

Then you should realise the autistic spectrum is huge and you can't compare your son to the Op,s
LEA,s have a legal duty to fund the provision named in the EHCP ,you can be as furious as you want but thats the Law.

Obviously that is not the case, as demonstrated by the number of tribunals appeals councils lose: each time they lose there has been a finding by experts in the field that the LA's judgment is wrong. Time and again, there are clear examples of LAs fighting utterly hopeless appeals, and indeed of overturning their own decisions once they realise that the parents will fight and they won't get away with it. Suggesting that LAs are infallible is just absurd.

Because if its the only place that meets the persons needs and named In the EHCP the LEA has ro fund it it's the law ,it doesn't matter what randoms on mumsnet feel about it.

Continue fuming then because unfortunately for you it happens. You also need to realise everyone with ASD has different needs, you can’t compare DS to others.

Also unfortunately for you, legally PfA and OT provision should be funded, so no it’s not down to the OP to teach DS.

It may be that OP's son's needs have been exacerbated by the lengthy delay in putting in place an EHCP. However, this is probably a result of the current pressure on special school places because there just aren't enough of them, which means that existing schools are picking and choosing more and are going for what looks like the easy options.

The truth is that the local authority’s budget is woefully inadequate.
It’s like feeding the five thousand.

Lawyers love the tribunals because it’s big bucks for them. Private specialist provisions love the tribunals because it’s big bucks for them too.

Money is leaking in torrents out of LAs to private companies which means there is never any left for LAs to improve their own locally funded provision, and the time of professionals like educational psychologists is taken up by tribunal after tribunal.

Underfunding education has been a political decision - vote for change.

So do you think it is OK to throw people with SEN and disabilities on the scrap heap?

Very naive view. LAs act without the best interests of the child/young person at the fore &/or unlawfully all the time. You do realise the majority appeals are upheld?
Not at that cost! Indeed LAs priority is money, so if there's evidence of cost savings, they'll jump at it.

What would be naive is to believe that £750 will resolve all the issues the young person is facing so that they can live a fully independent life and earn a good income meaning they will make it all up in taxes.

You do realise the majority of appeals are upheld? You do realise LAs act unlawfully all the time?

The more tribunals are brought to challenge this professional opinion it leads to there being even less money available

Why don’t LAs stop acting unlawfully then? Why don’t they stop spending vast amounts of money on representation to defend indefensible cases against unrepresented parents. Then there would be more money to spend on actual provision.

This is a typical cost of therapeutic residential college placements and despite the cost seeming expensive, the long term outcomes actually save cash. These colleges are life changing for the young people, developing self worth after years of inadequate childhood support, developing careers, living skills, community inclusion, communication, differing degrees of independence. A valuable stepping stone for young people who might otherwise spiral into more costly secure units or the criminal justice system. Everyone has the right to live a fulfilling meaningful life, with maximum independence, some people just need more support to do this.

OP your best bet is accessing specialist legal representation. Sadly this is often required to ensure the LA meet the ECHP.

Also why is the college now saying they can’t meet his needs? Can the psychologist write to the college and LA outlining how this will benefit him

The vast majority of people who use tribunals don't have lawyers, and they still succeed. Private specialist schools don't love tribunals, they would far rather that pupils are placed with them without having to wait a year (as is currently the case) for the tribunal to make a decision.

But yes, education certainly should be much better funded.

Yes, at that cost. Of course LAs will jump at saving money but that doesn’t make it lawful. Your view that if the LA thought they could prove it beneficial they would fund it is naive. No one said it would resolve all problems nor that it would be paid in taxes.

Sure, there are no guarantees, but it will massively improve OP's son's chances. Do you seriously imagine the LA's "outreach provision" will achieve that? It won't even be anywhere approaching full time, despite the Code of Practice saying that LAs should at the very least aim to put together a 5 days per week package.

It is obviously naive to believe that LAs always act in the best interests of children and young people with SEND. If you believe that, what is your evidence?

My son will never achieve any qualifications ,he's severely autistic with severe learning disabilities, he will however attend a specialist college from 19 -25 and his EHCP will fund that ,it will help him develop life skills and gain some independence, there's a lot of ignorance on this thread.

OP your best bet is accessing specialist legal representation. Sadly this is often required to ensure the LA meet the ECHP.

Not necessary. What is necessary is professional evidence to show that OP's son needs specialist provision, e.g. from an educational psychologist and others such as speech therapists and occupational therapists.

No I do not think that. The budgets are squeezed. Why should one person receive £750k worth of support when whole schools cannot provide adequate teaching assistant cover, when social carers cannot not their jobs properly as they are so stretched.