EHCP agreed for DD (17) - advice needed please on draft plan (which I think may not be fit for purpose)

[MuddlingThroughWithoutAClue]

Apologies that this is going to be longwinded - any insight and advice would be gratefully appreciated.

Received draft EHCP yesterday and I don’t think it good enough - lots of info but nothing quantified. I find the format quite confusing also and don’t really know where and how to start addressing the problems.

I have got the IPSEA and SOSSEN checklists but still feel fairly overwhelmed by the layout and wording.

DD(17) has a diagnosis of Generalised anxiety disorder with panic, low mood and social communication disorder (referred for ASD assessment). She rarely leaves the house due to high levels of anxiety and struggles to be around other people. Friendship difficulties in year 9 triggered school anxiety and year 10 was difficult and then the pandemic struck and school went online. DD was unable to return to school in year 11 despite reasonable adjustments (reduced timetable, dropping of subjects, safe place etc) and had medical needs tuition for the last few months of year 11 and was awarded one GCSE. DD is currently repeating year 11 via medical needs tuition - her lessons are virtual 1:1 live lessons. I am aware that the LA have no statutory duty to ensure education for post-16 students without an EHCP hence I need to get this right.

Applied for EHCNA in May and were refused. Put together with more info and a private EP report and LA agreed to assess when they received our appeal info. They refused our requests for SaLT, OT and clinical psychologist to be carried out as part of EHCNA stating that they didn’t make referrals and could only ask services if they had had prior dealings with/knowledge of DD. Used IPSEA model letter quoting SEN regs to no avail and also complained to director of childrens services - had a reply to say that children/YP had usually accessed all the services they needed by the time an EHCP was requested but that perhaps they should look again at their processes in the future as this might not be the case in a minority of children/YP! We were therefore surprised they agreed to issue an EHCP.

We received the draft plan yesterday and nothing is detailed or quantified. The covering letter states that we have 15 days to respond and name a school setting. Do we now enter into a negotiable with the LA over educational setting and content of the plan? Does that stop the clock or is there a time limit?

DD needs 1:1 lessons at home to try and get her GCSE’s (she is currently studying for 4) - how do I ask for this?

Section B (SEN needs) talks about DD’s significant anxiety but doesn’t mention panic, low mood or social communication difficulties.

Section C (Health needs) lists them all

Section D (Social care needs) - states “no needs identified”. I requested a social care assessment and the result was a referral to Early Help and we have subsequently had a TAF meeting (this was after the deadline for EHCNA evidence to be in).

Section E (Outcomes) - the plan talks in terms of outcomes sought by the end of the current Key Stage or phase of education. Do these outcomes change at reviews to reflect different stages of education? Also Preparation for Adulthood states “no outcomes identified” and I’m not sure that’s correct at age 17?

Section F (Special Educational Provision) - this is mainly seems to have been copied from the EP reports and is full of wording like “opportunities to”

Provision and funding for this is stated as “*Teaching and support staff from ordinarily available and top up funding”

Sections G, H1 & H2 -* all “none identified”

Section K isn’t complete and doesn’t include all the information we submitted with our appeal including the Independent EP report which the draft refers to at times.

I think I need to contact the LA and:

1. Question why there is missing evidence from section K
2. Tell them we can not name a school setting as DD needs 1:1 lessons at home (virtually or in person).
3. As that section F is quantified - ask them to go back to the LA EP for this information? (or ask the independent EP we used to be more specific - I don’t know why she didn’t or why I didn’t question it)
4. Should the CAMHS therapy DD is receiving be listed somewhere?

What else should I be questioning? Can I ask for mentoring to be included? Can I ask that more evidence is taken into consideration? E.g DD now has a care coordinator and is having weekly therapy, we’ve had the early help TAF meeting, letter from CAMHS medic requesting in support of exam access arrangements suggests that DD takes exams at home or in a room on her own due to high anxiety levels etc

Thank you

If maths needs to go on the back burner for now then so be it, there’s no rush and MH has to be the priority. Sadly it may be difficult for you to get it agreed DD can drop it completely for now due to government funding rules. However, there is an exemption when the pupil’s institution confirm it is not appropriate for them to study for either GCSE or a stepping stone qualification. There’s further information here.

With more support the current college may be the right one, but just so you can make an informed decision many specialist settings have animals/farms/stables. It is actually a sticking point for us finding a placement for DS1 because he is highly allergic to animals and has another medical condition that makes farms/stables high risk. It is a shame DD is now 17 because this school has an amazing reputation. The company do offer post 16 but I don’t know details of their offer.

Do you have evidence animals help? If I remember rightly DD did equine therapy, it’s possible you can get that, or something similar in the EHCP as well as the CBT therapist.

dory you are 100% right about getting an EHCP well written from the beginning...if it's possible. As it makes things so much easier in the long run.
We applied for an EHCNA in July 2020 at the end of year 11. Ds got his first finalised EHCP in Jan 2021. And it's been downhill ever since, as it's not worth the paper it's written on. He's now significantly mentally unwell and not in education.
And 17 months after applying we are still fighting for what he needs. With an appeal ongoing, it's likely to take months yet. I wish we had got it right earlier.

Teen the specialist college we are looking at for Ds is very much like dory describes. Very small, but with therapy embedded throughout the day. It definitely has some animals there too. It's just a bit of a fight to get the LA to agree to what he needs...

Good luck both the process, it is certainly very stressful.

Punx where are you with the appeal? Is that the college you were looking at belonging to the group named after the light in the sky? I think they have an animal care unit.

Feel free not to answer btw.

dory it's the light in the sky group! It's in a neighbouring county, but not actually that far away from the provision you linked to for teen.

The appeal.....it's complex. I probably need to start my own thread! I feel like we are in a bit of a mess. We are appealing the refusal to amend from the July AR. But they LA are also re writing the EHCP at the moment to consult with the specialist. But they have messed us around lots....and it feels like we are struggling to get anywhere.

Punx refusing to amend then amending, sums up your LA. I think there is someone else on MNSN considering the same college, if you haven’t spotted it I’ll PM you the thread. Although I may be wrong.

If Teen does pursue a specialist placement that might also be one to consider.

dory I think I might know the thread you are talking about....I wonder if it's the same one.
I'm still second guessing myself on if it's the right place for Ds. He has no goals, hopes or aspirations. No idea on what he wants educationally, apart from support and somebody to help him.... although he still thinks it's all too late for that and he's a lost cause. Dh and I have visited and had a long chat with the admissions manager. We were impressed with the holistic and therapeutic approach she talked about. After experiencing 3 schools that have not adequately met his needs, I'm desperate though, to not get this wrong again.

We do have another specialist college that's very close to home. But the organisation/group that run it, have some issues that seem quite worrying. Although I do know parents happy with it.

I don't know where to start with our LA.....it feels like a mess.

It's such a hard process. Muddling, hope you manage to get the EHCP sorted for your Dd.

I’ll PM you the thread. If the college nearer you is the group with multiple safeguarding concerns who don’t seem to learn from the many incidents I wouldn’t touch them with a barge pole, but as you say, some are happy with them. Having reread the thread I wonder if the other college nearer you is also being considered.

Have replied to your PM dory. Yes it is that group. I think it was on another thread that you directed me to some information about them. Concerning to say the least.

@Imitatingdory Thank you for the link. They might be good if Sparsholt proves too much. I wish I knew what I was doing...

Punx Yes I did, and on one of threads where we’ve previously discussed it another poster mentioned a senior staff member from one of the settings that was closed down due to safeguarding issues had moved to one in your region - rather worrying!

Teen if in the future you do look at specialist provision there are a couple of other potential placements that may be suitable so do look a round. I think everyone initially feels like you do.

The LA have responded to my email and answered my queries one by one. They have gone back to the EP's and requested more specific and quantified advice in section F as I requested and amended section B to include all DD's SEN. With regard to setting they have asked if we want to request that DD stays with the medical needs provision as they understand it is working for her and they say they are already in consultation with FE placements for next academic year (it would be wonderful if she was able to access the course she would like in person then but there's no way of knowing yet). She would like to remain where she is as she's just about coping but I didn't think we would be able to name it (or I thought we'd have to name her main registered school who can't meet her needs without the medical needs setting). To be honest the response se has thrown me slightly! Also asked what MH therapies I would like to be included after querying there aren't any. Offered an in person meeting if we would like one.

EOTAS shouldn’t be named in section I. Section I should be left blank and the provision specified and quantified in F. The MS should not be named, DD will not remain on the school’s roll as it is not the same as medical needs tuition for CSA pupils under section 19 of the Education Act 1996.

So, yes, DD can remain with the same service that are currently delivering medical needs tuition. However, you want more provision than DD is currently receiving. I don’t know how many hours tuition DD is currently receiving but even if she is receiving adequate tuition (which is unlikely considering the paltry amount often given via medical needs tuition) there is more to an EOTAS package than tuition.

Why are the LA already consulting with FE institutions for next year? When you haven’t been able to state your preference? Are they planning to issue an EHCP now that does not require amending again by April (which it would do if DD was going to start a different post 16 placement next September)?

It’s sounds like the LA are surprised DD needs MH therapies, surely they know what MH provision is needed from the reports.

If you have a meeting do not allow the situation to drag on going back and forth if you are unhappy. Push the LA to finalise and appeal.

Imitatingdory thanks again for your input. DD is taking 4 GCSE's and has 5 hours a week 1:1 tuition (virtual). She wants to stay with the medical needs provider this year - it took her a while to manage an entire week of lessons even though they are spaced across the week. It doesn't sound a lot but I suppose 1:1 is more intensive and I honestly don't think she could cope with more at the moment.

As for the LA getting in touch with FE providers, I think this most likely stems from the fact that DD has expressed an interest in an FE course after GCSE's and this has been recorded in EP reports and her MyPlan. One of the FE colleges has a good reputation for being inclusive and I have previously discussed options with the head of SEN/Inclusion who said she had a good working relationship with the LA EHCP team. I have no idea what DD will be able to manage in September though and neither does anyone else.So if I've understood correctly the EHCP will need updating next April to take in consideration September 2022 education opportunities?

MH therapies - the reports consist of CAMHS reports/letters and EP reports. In actual fact the only therapy ever mentioned has been CBT and DD's care coordinator assessed her as not being ready for that sort of intensive therapy. And I was unable to get SaLT and OT done during the needs assessment so actually I don't know what sort of MH therapies should be included. The form DD's CAMHS psychiatrist completed for the EHCNA has set questions and under actions the suggestions are "adjust medication", "refer to neurodevelopmental department", give advice on managing anxiety" and unders resources to achieve outcomes "CAMHS" has been written against every line! So not much for the EHCP team to go on really. I have no idea what adult services will be like when DD gets there.

I have now had SaLT report and recommendations are that DD would benefit from practicing conversations and writing scripts and rehearsing scripts - around developing language around emotions and talking about emotions. It also says she may need "thinking time" as she has some difficulty holding information in her head.

I requested a leaflet about personal SEN budgets and still feel baffled about the whole thing and not even sure if DD would qualify for one anyway.

Does the fact that DD is still on role with her mainstream school but out of year complicate matters (I understand she is no longer of CSA)?

If/when DD can cope with more tuition 5 hours is not enough.

With EOTAS via the EHCP DD will no longer be on roll at the school, section I will be blank and the provision in F. It is not like EOTAS provision under s.19, Education Act 1996 where pupils should remain on the school’s roll. CSA is only relevant when provision is under section 19, Children’s Act 1996, not when provision is via an EHCP. It doesn’t matter that she is Y12 but doing GCSEs, EHCPs allow personalised provision.

Achieving a good EOTAS package is going to be difficult with the reports you have. You need some specific evidence of what provision is required. The MH evidence is why independent assessments will help, unless you are lucky CAMHS reports are rarely detailed enough. It doesn’t much matter what adult services are like if you secure the provision in section F, as it must be provided even if that means independent providers. The SALT report with “would benefit from” and “may need” is too vague, even removing them the report doesn’t sound detailed.

If DD is moving post 16 placement the amended EHCP needs finalising by April (5 months before a move from one post 16 placement to another). Have you looked at specialist FE placements?

Have you read the SENCOP’s information on personal budgets? You have a right to request a personal budget, and the LA should identify a PB unless the disaggregation of funds would have a negative effect on services for others with EHCPs or it’s not an efficient use of LA resources.

Apologies for not replying sooner. The LA want DD to have mainstream named on EHCP so that she can continue to access the medical needs tuition while repeating year 11. They say EOTAS has to be approved by senior managers and that DD would then not be able to access her current provision if it was approved.

They have amended section B to include all of DD's SEN and they have requested more detailed and quantities advice from the LA EP however the EP is on sick leave so it will not be received in time to be included in the final EHCP but LA say they will update once they have it (I have this in writing for what it's worth).

They are leasing with FE as to whether they can meet her needs or not ready for amending the EHCP next March/April for transition to post-16 and they have contacted the setting DD has previously expressed an interest for in addition to a the nearer us (both offer the course DD is interested in).

Our case coordinator says the LA needs to finalise and issue the plan to meet the statutory deadlines and that they will amend once the aforementioned EP amendments come back and also if any recommendations come from the OT assessment DD is due to have (it's an NHS referral so I wouldn't think so). They will include appeal information should we wish to take that option. We are going to have a meeting next week to go over queries and questions we've got.

I'm still undecided on what to do to be honest. The case coordinator has sent detailed and prompt replies and I believe the LA are correct to issue the final EHCP in order to meet the timescales. I don't think DD would cope with any upheaval and change of provision at this point. Originally when we applied for an EHCP it was because we wanted her to be protected to continue to have some kind of education and that is currently happening as a result of the MS and medical needs tuition supporting the repeat which I believe is rare.

As for post-16 placements I have serious doubts that DD will be able to access the course she would like for the simple fact that she would need to go to the setting in person and I can't imagine that being possible in 10 months time. If she was capable of attending she could have gone this year and started at a lower level. This is something I want to discuss at the meeting next week and alternative options available. As for therapies, DD has now been awarded PIP so could potentially use some of that to explore therapies that she would most likely not be able to access via the NHS/CAMHS and see what if anything works for her.

I have looked briefly for specialist FE provision in our area and not found a lot and certainly nothing so far that DD would have any interest in. She is academically bright but has never had much interest in any school subjects. There is only one course she has expressed any interest in and it is also the thing she spends most of her spare time doing (from her bedroom - I'm sure you can work out the type of thing I'm talking about).

I know that to get a really good EHCP we will need to appeal and I'm not sure if we've got the energy but as I say, still thinking.

Your first paragraph is your LA putting you off. Mainstream should not be named in section I, it is not appropriate for DD’s needs at the moment (and it is unlikely DC who cannot cope in mainstream secondary can cope in a mainstream FEI). Section I should be blank. Case law is clear on this, most recently NN v Cheshire East (SEN) [2021] UKUT 220 (AAC).

Do you mean the LA are going to name a specific mainstream school, or name mainstream as the type of provision but without a specific school? If the latter case law dictates where mainstream is named as the type the LA should normally name a particular school too - MH v Hounslow [2004] 770 [2004] ELR 424.

If the EHCP is finalised naming mainstream it leaves you in a precarious position. Without EOTAS provision detailed, specified and quantified in F the LA could pull the plug at any time and you could not enforce the provision. There is no reason DD could not access the same tutors, if the LA are saying otherwise it is questionable local policy rather than a legal reason. DD can access qualifications at home if she cannot attend a FEI.

Suspiciously, I imagine the LA wish to name mainstream as the type now in order to name a mainstream FEI in April without any home tuition and when challenged they can say ‘but mainstream was always the type”

The course could be delivered at home if DD can’t attend a placement or there isn’t one suitable.

Personally, I would appeal - a) for EOTAS, b) for therapies as DD does not need to use her PIP, and c) because even having it in writing you cannot guarantee the LA will amend, and you would most likely be out of the appeal window by that point, much better to submit an appeal and not need it, than wish you had.

Have you looked at specialist provision out of area, including boarding depending on DD/your thoughts on that?

Sorry, I meant the LA want to name current mainstream in I so DD continues to receive the medical needs tuition. When they say she won't be able to continue with her current provision if we don't name her MS I presume it's a something to do with funding?

We have not said we agree to then naming MS although we said that we would like her to be able to continue with the provision she currently has. Have also expressed extreme reservations about the the likelihood of DD being ready/able to attend an FE site in September 2022.

Can the LA name DD's current mainstream without our agreed be? (Probably already have as they were so keen to stick to deadline).

If they name current MS and we go to appeal can the LA remove the provision DD is currently receiving while we appeal? It's not the tuition she's getting now that I want to appeal but next September's provision so it feels slightly odd.

I haven't looked into specialist provision in any detail and certainly only locally (I'm really not sure what DD needs.) She would not like to travel and would hate the idea of boarding. She often becomes anxious if she's alone in the house for any length of time (fortunately that's an infrequent occurrence).

I can see that to name DD's MS as a means to an end to allow her to carry on with the provision she currently has does not acknowledge that she needs/will need very different provision going forward. If only it was straightforward! Thank you

Medical needs tuition can be provided without being on a mainstream school’s roll. Funding isn’t your concern, especially when the LA plan to name MS when it is inappropriate.

However unlikely you think it may be don’t underestimate how low LAs will stoop. It’s quite possible they will finalise with MS then not provide the tuition if it is not in the EHCP. LAs often promise the world then deliver nothing. Don’t be too trusting.

During an appeal the LA are still responsible for ensuring provision specified and quantified in section F is provided. Your problem is likely to be the EHCP isn’t fit for purpose with EOTAS provision specified and quantified in section F so you won’t be able to enforce it - this would be the case regardless of when you needed to enforce it. Many parents don’t realise the EHCP isn’t worth the paper it is written on until it is too late and they need to enforce the provision, but can’t.

The LA can finalise with whatever placement they wish, even if you don’t agree. Once the LA have given you 15 days to make representations on the original draft, as long as any further amendments are a result of your representations they can finalise without consulting you further and name whatever placement they want.

Depending on if the LA are going to issue an EHCP now that covers next academic year so they don’t have to amend in April or not you may not be able to appeal section I for next year now.

Thank you again.

Please bear with me as I am finding it quite difficult to understand everything.

So the LA can name the mainstream whether we agree or not after the 15 day consultation period (it was 15 days by the time we received it as it took 3 days to arrive via post).

We can appeal and during this time the LA still have to deliver what's in section F (which is in this case not specified and quantified due to vague reports). Could they name the MS and also remove the medical needs tuition she is currently receiving leaving her with nothing?

Please can elaborate on your final point? If we haven't agreed to naming a MS on the EHCP and have expressed serious concerns about DD being able to physically attend FE next academic year - if we go to appeal I'm unclear why we may not be able to appeal section I for next September? Are the LA allowed to issue a plan now that covers next year too? The draft mentions that she will need a tailored transition plan to post-16 but not when or where. If that's the case and we can't do anything including appeal then it feels like we've been doomed from the started and there wasn't anything we could have done to change things.

I wish someone would wave a magic wand and sort it all out! It's so unfair what parents have to go through to get the support they need for their children.

I meant we had less than 15 days from the date of the draft by the time we received it. Have's seen the amended copy yet.

So the LA can name the mainstream whether we agree or not after the 15 day consultation period

Yes, many parents disagree about the placement named in section I.

We can appeal and during this time the LA still have to deliver what's in section F (which is in this case not specified and quantified due to vague reports).

Yes, the LA still have to ensure section F is provided, but enforcement is only possible when it is detailed, specific and quantified. Punx once posted a good depiction of what vague and woolly wording means, but I can’t find it now. Can you remember it @Punxsutawney?

Could they name the MS and also remove the medical needs tuition she is currently receiving leaving her with nothing?

Unless the tuition is detailed, specified and quantified in section F the LA can stop provision at any time, and you would have no recourse. You would have to ask for an early review, but if the LA refused to hold one you have no right of appeal. So would have to either wait for the AR or request a reassessment of needs, which does have the right of appeal if refused.

I meant we had less than 15 days from the date of the draft by the time we received it.

The LA must legally give you 15 days. If they don’t you can threaten JR, but that’s likely pointless now. Just finalise and appeal.

Have's seen the amended copy yet.

The LA don’t have to show you an amended draft before finalising, unless any amendments aren’t as a result of your representations. SENCOP 9.125

if we go to appeal I'm unclear why we may not be able to appeal section I for next September?

The draft mentions that she will need a tailored transition plan to post-16 but not when or where. If that's the case and we can't do anything including appeal then it feels like we've been doomed from the started and there wasn't anything we could have done to change things.

You will be able to appeal section I for next year at some point, but might not be able to do it yet. You may not be able to appeal section I for next year yet because the LA might only issue an EHCP that covers the current academic year, then amend the EHCP in time for April. At which point you would then be able to appeal the placement named in I for next academic year (and if you appeal I you should appeal B&F as they will be written to support the LA’s choice of placement). EHCPs only have to be amended 5 months prior to a move from one post 16 placement to another, which would be April, so you cannot force the LA to name next years placement now.

The transition plan (properly specified and quantified) should be in section F, not I, therefore, in theory, you could appeal that now regardless of whether section I only covers this academic year or both this year and next. However, if the EHCP only covers this academic year, it is pointless appealing and organising transition now, as you cannot know where DD will be going.

Are the LA allowed to issue a plan now that covers next year too?

I’m not aware legislation specifically covers it either way. Many LAs do specify the following year’s placement when finalising first EHCPs at this point in year. However, the LA cannot now issue an EHCP with a section I that isn’t properly specified in order not to have to amend again. Case law clarifies the LA cannot rely on their own incompetence in order not to have to amend for transition.

That was longer than I intended, apologies.

Is this it dory?

Muddling we have had what feels like 150( that's probably an exaggeration) EHCP drafts over the last year. All non specific and not quantified. Even when the LA are trying to improve it, it's still not specific enough. And list provisions such as 'travel training' but with no explanation of how often, when or where.

Ds's non specific EHCP has given him absolutely nothing and his needs not being met, means he is now out of education.

That’s the one, Punx. It shows how important wording is and the inability to enforce vague provision. It would never be tolerated in other areas of law, and you would never trust an employer who gave you such a terrible contract.