Independent Support and SEND Reforms

[RuthieN16]

Who knows that there is an Independent Support (IS) Service other than that offered by the Local Parent Partnership in every borough in the UK? IS services are not funded by local authorities so are completely independent of them. (funded until March 2016)
IS's help parents through the transfer from Statements to Education Health Care Plans and support parents through new EHC Plans. They also help young people aged 16-25 contribute to their EHC Plan. All transfers from SEN statements to EHC plans have to be completed by Summer term 2018 and boroughs have prioritised age groups.
The Council for Disabled Children have a list on their website to say which organisation provides IS in each borough.
Good idea to read the info on the SEND Reforms on the CDC website so that you are well informed and don't forget that the local Parent Partnership deals with a lot more than EHC Plans. If you are told things about what your child is or is not entitled to under the SEND reforms, and you are not sure if that is right, then check it out.... particularly if current resources are removed! The new SEND reforms are supposed to make things better for children and give them and their parents a voice!

The trouble is that when these were set up the government was terribly careful to say that they wouldn't be helping parents to challenge LAs or deal with appeals. I think parents are generally better off going to genuinely independent organisations like SOS SEN for advice.

The idea of IS support is to help parents and Young people through the EHC process and it won't always end up with having to challenge the LA. I know that for some IS services, their brief is to try and help hard to reach parents and young people.
It is true that IS can't help to challenge BUT can hold LA's to account when they are not following the code of practice and keep parents and young people better informed about what is out there and what the LA should, and more importantly should not, be doing.

It is good that IS support is giving young people a voice too and making it harder for the LA to make choices about them without them.

We're using them. Ds2 (18 ASD/LD) is transferring his LDA to a EHC so that he can do a supported internship - the lady is lovely and is helping him fill in his contribution as its all person centred and I didn't want college to help him do it in case they put words in his mouth or didn't give him a neutral explanation of the process or what his options were

That's good! I know several parents who have also found Independent Supporters have enabled their young people to have a voice and express what their aspirations are and have been pretty insistent that these views are taken seriously. Pity the funding only goes up until the end March 16!

It is true that IS can't help to challenge BUT can hold LA's to account when they are not following the code of practice...

That's interesting... what powers do the IS have to hold LAs to account? Can they do more than just highlight unlawful behaviour? Where do they draw this power from?

Like ici, I've been a bit sceptical of the IS setup, but if they are genuinely able to hold LAs to account - and LAs are deterred from unlawful behaviour by this accountability - then I'd definitely change my opinion.

Here's an example.... DS2's best mate is in Y6, a transition year. The law clearly states that his final amended statement should have been with parents by the 15th February. The parents finally received it last week. Eight weeks after the deadline. His parents had e-mailed the LA, phoned the LA, turned up at council main reception. Nothing doing.

This LA's SEN team knew the law, and knew precisely what it was doing - restricting this child's legal right to appeal to SEND First Tier Tribunal. This LA went ahead and did it anyway. The family's chances of getting a decision about secondary school placement before the start of the next academic year is now non-existent.

This LA SEN team did this, because it believes itself to be effectively unaccountable. Could Independent Supporters have made a genuine difference here, in a case where the LA set out to disregard its legal obligations from the start? If so, how?

IS's have no legal power but can help parents identify and challenge poor practice at each stage of the EHCP process. They have been particularly useful for parents who may not feel they have the confidence or capacity to challenge of even know when the LA is doing something they shouldn't or not doing something they should be doing. IS will also signpost to other services if they can't help, like the local IASS (Parent Partnership) who has a wider brief than IS. They are an additional resource which not all parents are told about by the LA's who may not like the involvement of a service that is not funded by the LA and therefore not accountable to it!

In the case of DS2's best friend, it is unlikely that an IS would be involved until the statement is transferred to an EHCP. I believe that yr 6 is no longer a priority year for transfer to EHCP so the provision identified in the statement will carry on into yr 7.

Generally, I think that IS's can make a difference in helping parents to identify when LA's are disregarding its legal obligations and can also feed back to the DfE via the CDC when this occurs. I also think that the earlier an IS is involved in the EHCP process, the better.

Ruthie is right IS wouldn't be involved unless a statement was in the process if being transferred to a plan or a first time EHC assessment is under way. With regard to the year 6 child the LA is legally obliged to name a sec school in a statement or EHC plan by 15 Feb. it's the same date every year and is in the old and new codes of practice. If this particular LA didn't do so then it has acted unlawfully and your friend would have grounds for making a formal complaint and if not satisfied taking it to the Local Gov Ombudsman for maladiministration. Alternatively a judicial review could be considered. IPSEA can advise on this. The Ombudsman could possibly make an order for compensation for distress caused by the maladiministration. This often encourages LAs to sharpen up their practices.