Acute Social/Medical Need - Primary Application (Reception) Sept 2015 - Help Please!

[MiniMooP]

First post, so please be kind!
Advice from Mumsnet School Application Experts please?
Is there anything we can do? Should we give up now?

Acute Social/Medical Need priority - Primary (Reception) Sept 2015 – DS referred to LA SEN multi-agency, but diagnosis / supporting documentation from medic will not be received before forthcoming deadline! Only got Nursery letter of support!

Would (arguably weak) supporting documentation help in Appeal? i.e. if DS gets diagnosis subsequently which supports initial evidence?
Or does initial case have to be strong to argue that not giving DS first choice of school could be considered 'unreasonable', i.e. the decision to refuse admission was one in which a reasonable admission authority would not have made in the circumstances of the case?

Ps Case for specific school argues for 2 types of established CBT therapy, which can be achieved only by attending this school as consequence of known cohort, geographic location and specialism.
Thank you in advance!

If this is an infant class size appeal you can only win on limited grounds. The only applicable grounds here would be that the decision to refuse admission was unreasonable. The appeal panel should only look at the evidence that was available to the LA at the time it made its decision not to put your child in the social/medical need category.

It is not unknown for appeal panels to bend the rules and take into account subsequent information if there is a good case but that very much depends on the panel.

If the LA decide that your child needs an EHC plan (Education, Health and Care) you will be able to specify which school you want named in the plan. In most cases the LA must name the school you want. The school must then admit your child even if it is already full.

It is for the LA to make a decision under what admission criteria your child will be offered a school place. From what you have said, at present the available evidence is very thin. I think you need to bolster that and I would email the admission manager and everybody else that is involved, saying that this is an active case under consideration by the LA and asking that before any decision is made on the admission criteria applied that all parties do agree verbally what the situation is. By doing that you have put the onus on them to make a decision. If that decision is based solely on the available written evidence (which is legally correct) then I am afraid it is unlikely that your child will be considered under the medical criteria and therefore probable that the school allocated will not be your preference.

As PRH says you need to be working towards getting an EHC as that will allow you to name the school. That however may not happen before any appeal. By sending the email to everybody, you can produce that at the appeal as clear evidence that the LA made a decision to ignore the possibility of gaining more verbal or written evidence in making the decision it did. Any subsequent written evidence from experts involved is also needed to show that there was a reasonable case to talk to others involved. Unreasonable in terms of admission is legally something that is a perverse decision and it will be for the panel to make such a decision.

If I was presented with a case where the LA knew it was an active case under consideration, that all were asked by the parents to avail themselves of verbal or written evolving evidence before making a decision and that they decided to ignore that, then I would be seriously considering that this was unreasonable providing that the parents could prove the severity of the special needs involved and reasons for that particular school.

Thank you v much prh47bridge for your concise answer.

You confirmed my fears - most likely too little too late?

If there is anything else you (or anyone else) thinks we should / could do based on the below extra info, I'd be most grateful for further advice.

Unfortunately, because (the severity of) this came out only late last year (for goodness sake, DS was only 3!) AND DS has been referred on from one agency to another without actually being formally assessed by either, it is looking like we will miss the deadline.

But I feel I need to do the best for DS. And feel woefully unprepared.

Re. Appeals:

I didn't even know that there were such things as 'infant class appeals' until reading about it on Mumsnet last night.

I assume by inference that there are other grounds for appeal, (such as error?). I presume none will be relevant to us?

Re. EHC:

If DS is diagnosed with social anxiety disorder / reluctant communication (and various associated high sensitivity issues incl. withdrawal and peer interaction), which is the way it is looking, then will it be argued that he doesn't need an EHC plan as this could be dealt with by in-school SEN?

I thought EHCs are hard to get as they involve money flowing from the LA?

In principle I would be ok with this ... if the school were 'a good fit', which we are discovering is fundamental in dealing with overcoming anxiety.

As per our first choice, 2nd closest local school (popular, on cusp of cut-off, probably won't get in on distance).

Our nearest will finish him off - huge challenges, not yet 'under control', being dealt with through hardcore discipline, so we didn't even apply.
Applied to next closest 6.

Any more thoughts most welcome. Thanks

Admission thank you!
I was taking so long trying to write a concise, non wittering, message that your message crossed with mine. So in the context of extra info you may think that my son's SEN is not 'severe' enough (we think it is pretty awful for him).
I think need to:

1. Look after DS who is off nursery today.
2. Sleep.
3. Process what you have written.
4. And find some inner courage grow some balls and make some calls

Thank you - what an amazing community - I didn't even know existed!

An infant class size appeal is where the school will have to run classes with over 30 pupils in Reception, Y1 or Y2 if the child is admitted. That includes the situation where the school is ok while the child is in Reception but it would cause a problem when the child gets to Y1. If you would like to identify the school and LA involved (PM me if you don't want to make the information public) I'll take a look and advise whether or not it is likely to be an ICS case. Most Reception appeals are heard under ICS rules but some are not. If this is not an ICS case you would have a much better chance of winning an appeal.

In an ICS case you can win if:

• the admission arrangements contravene the Admissions Code or the law, or
• the admission arrangements have not been applied correctly, or
• the decision to refuse admission was unreasonable

If they don't put your son in the Social/Medical Need category you would argue that the decision was unreasonable. On the other hand if you miss out because they've used the wrong home address you would argue that the admission arrangements have not been applied correctly.

The LA may decide that an EHC plan is not required. If that happens you are entitled to appeal against their decision but you would only succeed if your son needs more support than is available through normal SEN support.

Hope you manage to get the right result for your son.

Hi prh,
Thank you for suggesting I message you. Will do.

Don't rely on your LA telling you who is/isn't entitled to a EHCP. Look on IPSEA's website to get a much less biased account. If you think he is does meet the criteria (either now or further up the school) you need to have evidence to back this up. This evidence include Ed Psych assessments, CAMHS, peadiatric reports, SALT, OT (as applicable). But it also includes evidence from the school itself so start a paper trail now - email rather than phone (or if you phone write a note and email this to 'confirm what was agreed'), keep a diary of any incidents. Unfortunately, quite a lot of people have to fight hard to get the support their dc need, though there are good schools out there and good teachers and many children do get the support they need a EHCP or statement.

Thank you Bilberry, we aren't certain what direction we are heading yet, (in terms of diagnosis), but this is really useful advice - I am beginning to understand that Everything Needs Recording!!

Hello Admission

I'd be most grateful of some further clarification re. your comments as follows:

1. I assume that I should email the Head of Admissions as per your advice NOT colleague advised should be contacted ‘if need to discuss matter further’ (for which a telephone nos. only is provided in any case) - in reminder letter for ‘documented evidence’ …
2. You say ‘admission manager and everybody else’. Who is ‘everybody else’? Nursery, LA Area Senco, SEN medical, GP … ? The people that should be preparing the documented evidence?
3. I don’t understand why I would be notifying the LA that ‘this is an active case under consideration by the LA’? Won’t they know that? Sorry, confused!
4. Re. ‘all parties do agree verbally what the situation is’ Do you mean that I am requesting that all parties share between them, if necesssary by phone/meeting/email (‘verbally’?), whatever their current (even if requires further observation etc. prior to diagnosis) understanding of my son’s medical needs are – and why therefore there is a need for a place at a particular school?
5. I think I understand your last paragraph as to mean that, even if, on requesting verbal evolving evidence to be considered, the LA reject that request and therefore reject my initial application (on the grounds the evidence is not substantial enough (or substantiated enough?), not evolved or not documented formally in writing, by virtue of my having asked them to consider it at the time of the application, if I then go to appeal with more evolved evidence, (assuming it is substantial), it could be argued that they were unreasonable in rejecting originally my request for verbal evolving evidence to be considered … Have I got the gist or am I way off? Does this basically align with Prh’s ‘panels … take into account subsequent information …’ comment?

1. 'Evolving' seems to be an important word. Does it have any legal meaning that is different to how a lay person might understand it that I should be aware of?

This has been so very helpful. Thank you again.

With apologies to Admission for answering questions directed to her...

1. I would contact both.

1. Everyone else involved in either the admissions process or assessing your son's needs.

1. You are notifying the Admissions department that your son is being assessed for SEN. Don't expect different parts of the LA to talk to each other. Your application for admission will not be cross referenced with other information they may hold about your son unless you flag it up to them.

1. Yes, that is exactly what you are requesting.

1. That is what Admission is saying. Basically by following Admission's advice you are giving the panel some justification for considering evidence that has emerged subsequently to you submitting your application. A panel may still decide not to consider the later evidence but you are increasing the chances that they will take it into account.

1. No special legal meaning. Just the ordinary English meaning of developing gradually.

I agree with my learned colleague and apologies for taking so long to reply.

My concern in your case as for every other case which is about social and medical needs is that it does depend on how the LA as the admission authority handles such requests. Different LAs have a very different levels of bar to get over before they will consider such requests. The two main LAs that i do appeals for, have a very high bar and very few reach the level of need that the LA is looking for before they will accept the medical evidence. Other LAs have much lower levels and there will be a considerable number of parents who are allowed to have their admission criteria on this basis.

Anything that pushes the bar in your favour you should take and by making the different parts of the LA talk to each other at least helps that. You would be amazed how insular some LAs are in terms of one department not knowing what the other department is doing. They just live in their own little silo and do not take any notice of what is going on elsewhere. The majority of appeals that we allow which are infant class size appeals are because one department knew facts that another department should have known but did not know and would have made a difference to the end decision. So the LA makes an unreasonable decision. The number of actual mistakes leading to a successful appeal is low.

Hello again admission
Thank you for the extra advice.
Would it be possible to PM you please?

sure no problem