EHCP support thread

[Phineyj]

My DD (10) is being assessed for EHCP. The council refused to assess (despite her already being diagnosed with ADHD, ASD, hypermobility and vision problems following eye surgery).

School have been supportive throughout and they are going above and beyond to keep her engaged in education.

She's about to go into year 6 though.

I took the LA to the tribunal and won.

They must produce the plan by 4th August. I think they probably will (they've stuck to deadlines so far...ish...). But I've got all the IPSEA complaint letter templates primed!

The hardest thing about the whole process is that no-one else in my life understands it or what it's like to spend all your free time essentially begging people to document the deficits your child has.

It is also a hard realisation that no-one cares much about your child's education except you.

I am also a teacher so I feel sad on behalf of the SEN DC I teach as I am told little about their needs (I spent a whole day doing DofE with one recently...I don't even know what her EHCP says...)

Join me if you are also grimly trekking through the EHCP jungle!!

@Phineyj I wouldn’t hold your breath for a response. There is an A to Z of acronyms here. Although there are some others too.

@Coatsy if DC is not attending school full time &/or is in a phase transfer year (or some other exceptional reason) you can requested an expedited hearing. SENDIST has agreed in the majority of cases where I have asked, including for my own DC’s cases. Still a long wait, but not quite as long.

@TeaInTheGarden LAs often take an age to communicate anything. However, the ‘panel’ may not actually exist. Some LAs hide behind the ‘panel’ when there isn’t one. Many years ago a MN’er caught her LA out with an FOI.

@ThomasWasTortured what do I do if I don't hear from them then? Do I just let SENDIST chase them up?

Gosh, well as I was typing that the LA response arrived in my inbox with an apology (although I guess the apology is to SENDIST) for missing their noon deadline. Right, better get to reading the many attachments...

Their argument boils down to that just because she's been receiving support at at a prep school, doesn't mean that she has needs that would need extra help at secondary. That's a bit circular, isn't it? They're also relying on the fact that she's intellectually able (they say top 3%! and yet she's only working at year 4 levels in year 6...). Grrr. They might as well be honest and say "you clearly have cash...eff off and pay for what you think she needs yourself."

And Dear Sirs, they start

😡

The LA’s stance won’t wash.

Wasn't thinking of naming and shaming @Phineyj, but more a catalogue of LA black ops style tactics (like omitting key documents, or manipulating dates), so that other people know what to be on the look out for. The information asymmetry is one of our key disadvantages. Can't remember if I was talking to you about the advantages of multi-time players over single-time players, or if that came up in another context, but that's a very closely related disadvantage, although BlueBrick and people like her, do go some way to helping us with that.

Do tell us the tale of the panel that wasn't and the FoI request - would love to be cheered up this afternoon with a funny story...

@MrsLamb the caseworker had told the MN’er the ‘panel’ had made the decision about her DC’s EHCP (I can’t remember what decision it was but it was not long after the transition to EHCPs so we are talking several years ago) but wouldn’t answer questions about who sat on said panel/minutes etc. So, the poster submitted an FOI request for details about the LA’s panel and the FOI showed no panel existed.

Twice I have seen LAs be caught out at Tribunal when they claimed a panel made a decision but they couldn’t produce any evidence.

It would be laughable if there wasn’t a vulnerable child in the middle of it all.

Some LAs do have a panel. Sometimes only 2 or 3 people but it allows the LA to distance themselves and provides a smokescreen.

Thanks @ThomasWasTortured . Am waiting for a SAR - that'll be interesting as presumably the 'panel' paperwork should be included...

@MrsLamb it should, but that is another thing LA’s play fast and loose with.

It is always interesting to cross reference SAR data from different organisations. Often correspondence between two organisations can be in one response but not the other. For example, emails between the LA and school should be in responses from both the LA and school, but you will sometimes find one or the other misses them out, especially when it doesn’t make them look good.

This is such an eye opener in terms of the extent of unlawful conduct in local government. Seriously, who knew that legal compliance has in some context become something that occurs only when convenient to the authority?

That might be a good idea then @MrsLamb.

I have noticed just today that the LA have attached the independent OT report we had done but not the one they commissioned, and their EP report's not attached either!

Probably not a coincidence that those are the reports detailing the main needs?

What happens when SENDIST notices I have submitted evidence the LA haven't - do I point that out to SENDIST now?

@MrsLamb the ICO is another service that is overwhelmed with complaints.

@Phineyj do you mean in the bundle? If the bundle doesn’t contain all information let SENDIST know.

Which bit's the "bundle"? Is it the appeal paperwork I sent? What I received today was the LA response. I don't understand the basis on which they chose what they attached.

Here is information about the bundle and what should be included, where, etc.

The LA’s initial response isn’t the bundle. The LA should include certain things in their initial response. These were updated earlier this year. You can read more here. But, LAs are still being quote evasive/vague/brief in their responses sometimes.

@ThomasWasTortured thanks, as ever! OK, so I understand - they have to make a bundle up and it includes what they've sent and it (should) include everything I sent too.

That solicitor link's an interesting read. I think I saw some pigs flying by. Or maybe it was just Santa...

We hope that the Tribunal’s substantial change in case management, will control Local Authorities to a greater extent and prevent appeals running when there is simply no basis for it which will incentivise Local Authorities to properly consider their legal duties and the proper content of an EHCP at the appropriate stage therefore avoiding the need for parents to appeal in the first place. Such an outcome would be beneficial to all, saving parents and the Tribunal substantial costs and time and allowing young people to actually receive the special educational support and provision that they require in a timely manner.

@Phineyj that was the hope. Pity it hasn’t worked out that way and LAs are still being allowed to submit inadequate responses.

I chased up the LA today…. They’ve agreed to issue! Such a relief!

@TeaInTheGarden hurray!

@TeaInTheGarden congratulations.

Thank you everyone. I’m late back to the thread, but I’m extremely pleased at the result.

@ThomasWasTortured thank you for the timescales information, very helpful.

@Phineyj Pigs fly indeed! The judge sitting at our hearing appeared to be exasperated that we were at tribunal. The LEA had no evidence to offer which trumped our extensive evidence. It was shameful.

I really do wish there was a governing body to hold such bad acting organisations to account. The LGO will not get involved once an appeal is an option, but this is where LEAs seem to behave the worst.

@TeaInTheGarden Well done. It’s a relief when you get the news.

@TeaInTheGarden yay! congratulations and well done, brilliant news 🙂

LA conceded day before hearing for me after doing nothing in the ten month wait. They agreed EOTAS when they issued final EHCP but refused my proposed small package and every other proposal and offered no alternatives. They conceded to a package 4x more expensive than I originally asked for because they hadn't made a case or gathered evidence. They paid me £4k for the complaint I submitted the day after the hearing. It cost them an extra £7k because they commissioned two services for 52 weeks rather than 38 so in all forcing me to Tribunal cost them an extra £50k. Just agreed today to pay me another £1.2k for being too slow ensuring all provision isin place.