EHCP support thread no. 3

[Phineyj]

A new thread for when no. 2 is full up.
Link to thread no. 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/4834986-ehcp-support-thread
Link to thread no. 2:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/4989146-ehcp-support-thread-no-2

I am the mum of an 11 year old girl with SEN and have spent the last 20 months battling for my local authority to issue an EHCP to support her transition from primary to secondary school. We are currently after draft stage after two tribunals. I've had so much useful advice and moral support from posters on here.

This new thread is here to help everyone, whether you're just starting out or are a battle-hardened veteran of years of this.

There is no such thing as a stupid question and there are many acronyms and technical terms so please ask for an explanation of anything that you don't understand.

SEN: special educational needs (sometimes SEND: special educational needs and disability)
SENCO: teacher at school charged with overall responsibility for students on roll with SEN
ECHNA: education care and health needs assessment - the process of a local authority commissioning reports to find out a child's needs
EHCP: the education care and health plan that details a child's needs and the agreed provision to meet them; a legally binding document
SENDIST: the special educational needs and disability tribunal - an independent appeal panel which considers parental appeals against Education Authority decisions about special educational needs.

@MinnieTruck you can do this. When you think you can’t, remember back to the beginning of the process when you thought DD wouldn’t get an EHCP and when you thought the appeal was too much.

@MinnieTruck Really good news, I’m so pleased for you!

@BrumToTheRescue and @UnendingSaga thanks so much for the excellent advice, I’ve also made a note of it as currently making my way through the reports and draft.

Feel completely out of my depth and already dreading the appeal paperwork. My draft has been allocated to a SOSSEN volunteer so just waiting for that to come back.

The LA are cutting into my 15 days to review by 4 days as they’re now keen to finalise by 20 weeks despite missing every deadline so far and despite my protests. I have raised this to the complaints team to add to my ongoing complaint and will escalate this after I get the final.

I don’t have the energy or capacity to challenge this at the moment as it’s like talking to a brick wall and I really just need to finalise as soon as possible.

They said if you’re happy for us to miss the 20 week deadline line put it in writing. I said no.

As I know they will ignore most of my amendments. Plus I’m worried if I don’t meet their new deadline then they will just finalise as it is.

I got the written feedback back from both NHS OT and SLT teams re the report verification and gave both teams a peace of my mind.

@BrumToTheRescue that’s very true. I thought the appeal would kill me but here I am, very much alive. Thank you for the reminder:)

Thank you! @Ponche how are things going with you? I haven’t managed to fully catch up on the thread so far but sounds like you’ve received a draft but need to appeal certain sections, is that right?

Still no progress here. No word from the case worker on placement. No response to my stage 1 complaint (was told the deadline for that was Monday). Just nothing. I've emailed my MP today to see if maybe that might spark something. Although given they've only just come back I guess that might take a while to action. I'd quite like the MP to know what a shitshow it is anyway.

I have named a LA special school, they have been consulted and for a few (stupid) reasons they are saying they can't meet need. While we are slowly making changes to the working document, ds won't be visited by the EP till September, I have asked tribunal to extend deadline for evidence.

I had contact with the school a while ago when I was asking for specialist v mainstream now specialist has been agreed its proving tricky! I am going to ask that the ss meet with ds possibly allow hime to visit. Can anyone give suggestions? I want to get my foot in the door sooner rather than later it seems ridiculous that this school and the other LA special school's would absolutely be the right place (and only setting). If LA deem it suitable can they name it, this is what I thought.

@Wednesdayy123 if specialist is agreed, has the LA named another SS or have they only named type?

The school can be named even if they object. The LA, or the Tribunal as part of the appeal, must name your preferred placement unless the LA can prove:
-The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs (“SEN”) of the child or young person; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the provision of efficient education for others; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources.

Good luck @Wednesdayy123 we are in the opposing camp. LA says the panel have recommended mainstream (stays where he is) and rheyre about to finalise and it will say that so won't take up our request for a specialist school. Have asked to see the decision of the panel in writing so we know what they've based it on.

@BrumToTheRescue can I ask what arguments can be used against these points when we go to tribunal please:

• The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs (“SEN”) of the child or young person; or

-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the provision of efficient education for others; or -The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources.

Tribunal for B and F tomorrow afternoon.

Have 1 witness but not a 2nd (OT) as LA chose to dispute longstanding provision very late in the day in the working document process so she was already booked up.

Am slightly concerned they may ask us questions on the her evidence about appropriate provision we can't answer. They are claiming provision is 'too much'.
We have all the evidence and they haven't come up with anything substantial to counter it so I am hopeful of a positive outcome for DS.

Any last advice for us?

Will come and update tomorrow evening on how it went, and if anyone has a first one coming up I will share our experience.

Thanks for all the help so far, especially from @BrumToTheRescue.

Keep your fingers crossed for us.

@Alltheyearround good luck. If you need a break at any point, ask. Don’t try to second guess the outcome as you go along or immediately afterwards. Many feel the hearing isn’t going well/hasn’t gone well even when it is successful. Try not to worry about not having the OT there. You have the statement countering the LA’s points.

@Bendattheknees if the LA refuses for one or more of those reasons, the starting point is drilling down into the precise reasons and what evidence they have. It isn’t enough for LAs to just say it. They have to provide actual reasons and evidence.

For example, if the LA state it is an inefficient use of resources, dig into the costs. All the costs. Not just the ones the LA cherry picks. Look at transport, is there transport already going DC could join? Equipment costs? SALT/OT costs?

Or LAs often use behavioural difficulties mean it is incompatible with the efficient education of others but a) additional staffing would resolve the issue and b) the behavioural difficulties are a result on the overwhelming environment in mainstream and won’t exist in the same way in an environment that better meets DC’s needs.

Or if the LA is claiming the school can’t be named because it is full, what is it specifically that means it is incompatible with the efficient education of DC/others or use of resources? Because being full on its own isn’t enough. It needs to be more than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”. How many DC do they have in class? How many adults? Size of rooms? Do other EHCPs limit the class size?

It is difficult to say how you could challenge it without knowing the specific arguments of the LA. You do all this alongside showing the LA’s proposed school(s) can’t meet needs.

Thanks Brum! Appreciate the advice from you and every person here. It's what we thought, let's see their reasoning and unpick that.

Fingers crossed AllTheYearRound!

Feels like months since I posted but I’m a long time stalker and occasional poster here! After 22 months, an appeal for refusal to assess, an almighty scrap over B, F and I, the naming of mainstream (which had already said no way!) we FINALLY today were informed they’ve agreed to place at the special independent we’ve been self funding for 3 years. (Which he’s thriving at).
I’m still a bit in shock! But wanted to share as these posts have given me hope over the months!
I did it alone, no legal assistance (I questioned my sanity daily but with already paying the fees it was out of reach financially) mainly IPSEA letters/ examples and suggestions, my own rants, and advice from others on here! It’s been relentless but I’m proud of myself. As you should all be, for fighting for your child/ children.
keep up the good fight! And have hope! 💪🏻 x

Well done @Fruitbatdancer!

Wonderful news @Fruitbatdancer, well done on persevering.

@Alltheyearround good luck tomorrow. I hope it goes your way.

@BrumToTheRescue thanks for your reply! Response from school i am pushing for-

1. The child’s attendance is incompatible with the efficient use of resources. We have

no capacity in the appropriate class or Key Stage, therefore, cannot provide them an appropriate peer group, the required support and teaching, or the physical space required. As a result we are not able to effectively meet the needs identified in the plan.

1. Due to the current lack of available capacity (as explained in point 1 above), the

addition of this pupil would pose a health and safety risk to themselves and others. The safety of our pupils is our paramount concern.

Another special school which I would be equally happy for ds to attend has taken points from his EHCP and ran with them "we can't give him 2:1" he needed that in ms but absolutely would not need that in the correct setting. Another was "he has anger outbursts and Is physically aggressive" again unmet needs in ms. They also used the dysregulation he faced after school (ms) as a reason.

There responses and 'reason's' have shocked me, I did not think this would be part of the battle.

His current mainstream is named as it went to panel for a second time after annual review. LA have said he stays on role until specialist placement is found.

The caseworker is dare I say being helpful we have a meeting next week to talk through changes and see what can be amended without evidence, things need to be worded better, also removed... we will see how that goes.

I have contacted headteacher as I think a conversation may help and I will ask if they can meet ds.

@Bendattheknees Panel said dd should remain at ms and that they can meet need. Piles of evidence that they are not and clearly can't. Decision was changed last week after mediation. They have agreed specialist. Get it finalised and appeal, also don't write off mediation for the decision regarding the type of setting, good luck!

When you have the right of appeal I would just get the mediation certificate and submit to SENDIST. Don’t delay submitting for mediation. It rarely resolves BFI appeal, and if the LA is going to concede they will do so whether you actively partake or not.

@Wednesdayy123 even if DS did need 2:1, that could be provided. For the other SS, start by asking questions such as how many DC are in each class, how many adults, size of classes. Have they had more pupils in the past? If so, how many and when? What specifically are the health and safety risks?

Hi @BrumToTheRescue any suggestions for wording for the email threatening JR?
I was going to reference the annual review date, the due date, my original complaint and then give a deadline by which I will have to start potential judicial review proceedings if they do not rectify matters. The AR was 3rd June, any idea on a suitable deadline?

I have also requested AP (to the same person) so might be looking at 2 JRs 😬

@SaltBlossom you can use IPSEA’s model letters. Letter 8 for failure to complete the AR. Letter 22b for failure to provide AP. You will also need to use the letter (no.6) for failure to provide provision in F if there is anything detailed, specified and quantified in F that isn’t being provided.

Hi @BrumToTheRescue I have already written to the DCS with model letters 8 and 22b. So to follow up do I just need to say that since they have not responded (to letter 8 so far) I will be beginning JR process?

@SaltBlossom yes, refer them to your previous communication and include the dates. Explain you have had no reply. Then inform them they have left you with no option but to seek legal advice in order to pursue judicial review proceedings. And that if they wish to prevent this, they should take urgent action to complete the AR and provide AP.

If you want further guidance around wording, SOSSEN have suggested wording on their website.

If you haven’t already, try including the Monitoring Officer in your communication.

Appeal submitted for appeal against contents of I b and f through a solicitor with legal aid. The deadline for the la to submit their response on how they like like to proceed with the appeal passed 2 weeks ago. The la had already solicitor know they had conceded place on school and so it's now b and f. Solicitors haven't informed of of la response. I've chased 3 times now and nothing?! Should I expect to hear back or is it likely to be generic response from la and so that's why they haven't?! Thanks

Well I'm not sure if it was coincidence or the threat but I got the decision NOT to amend back this afternoon. I am flabbergasted at the decision but there we are.

From the case worker:
"Panel do not agree at this time that x needs a change of placement, the school have not contacted the Local Authority seeking additional support and x is making progress in some areas. X will be going into Year 6 shortly and the process of phase transfer so panel felt it would be detrimental at this time to potentially move x for the last year of primary school and then again for secondary education.

Following this decision, I have spoken wit the Head of SEN to see what we can do to help further. She has agreed to increased banding to C and has advised to seek further support through the Education Welfare Officer and Educational Psychologist.

I have also asked for the annual review team to now send out the no to amend letter, and this will give you your right to appeal the decisioning should you wish."

I replied:

Thank you for your email. I am at a complete loss however. If you can assist with any of the below points this would be greatly appreciated:

Please can you confirm that the panel were aware that x has not attended school since Easter, and only sporadically in the Spring term? How can a child not attending a placement long-term be described as not needing a change of placement?
Any 'progress in some areas' x has made is largely due to her natural intelligence as she certainly hasn't spent much time in the classroom in 2024.
Please can you confirm that the panel were aware that I was seeking a consultation/placement with xxx , thus negating the need to move again at Y7?
I don't understand how the statement 'agreed to increase banding to C' reconciles with 'no to amend' - surely this would require amendment?
Who will seek help from the EWO and EP? On what basis would the EP be consulted
Does the LA intend that this annual review be used for transition purposes?

But I guess we are off to appeal. And DD will still be out of school in Sept as she will not attend her school.

@SaltBlossom it is disappointing the LA plan to maintain as is and you will need to appeal. Better you know now rather than the LA stringing you along longer though.

@246810k LAs’ responses often consist of generic arguments, at least in part, but they must still comply with SENDIST deadlines.