EHCP support thread no. 4

[Phineyj]

We've nearly filled the thread again, so here's a new one. Welcome everyone: newcomers, people stuck in the process; battle-hardened veterans of many years...

Here are links to previous threads:

EHCP support thread - www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/4834986-ehcp-support-thread

EHCP support thread no. 2 - www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/4989146-ehcp-support-thread-no-2

EHCP support thread no. 3 - www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/5077140-ehcp-support-thread-no-3

We are having an ongoing issue with our LA regarding OT assessment. I requested OT assessment as part of the EHCNA - DD has clear sensory difficulties and has been seen by OT during primary. OT response was " not known to service" and I pushed back, but was told that they declined to assess. I asked if the LA would therefore commission an independent assessment and was told it wasn't necessary. I complained to the LA and they said it was up to the professional judgement of the team. The EP then noted in her report significant sensory issues and gave some general provision but said more specialist provision was needed.

When I asked LA to follow up on this, the response came back that they had met with the clinical lead for OT and she said that the EP was not qualified to request or expedite OT assessments and has complained to the EP service.

I am stunned. No-one has denied she has OT needs, the code of practice is clear that any reasonable parental request should be provided, yet the LA says the clinical team won't assess and the EP should get back in her box..... I shouldn't be surprised really but their utter contempt for the process astounds me.

I am assuming the best option here is to finalise, appeal and get a private OT to take to tribunal? I know which private providers the LA uses, so presuming that using that option will reduce the risk of LA saying it is not appropriate provision?

@handmademitlove Yes, appeal when the LA finalise. In the meantime, you could try contacting to the DMO/DCO &/or the MO.

Personally, I wouldn’t use the provider the LA uses unless the professional is also well regarded for independent tribunal standard reports. Often HCPs the LA use do not produce tribunal standard reports, especially for OT.

Once you appeal, you could request SENDIST directs the LA provides advice and information from an OT. Although this is guaranteed to work and may not be a good assessment, especially when we are talking about OT that includes sensory integration.

You could, in theory, threaten JR. Many don’t go down this route for failure to seek info under Reg 6(1)(h) because it doesn’t guarantee a watertight report.

@BrightYellowTrain thank you. The response I mentioned from the LA was in response to a level1 and then level 2 complaint. The level 1 response said they only had to ask for advice, not actually get it. Then when I escalated to level 2 and pointed out they do have to obtain advice, they changed tack and said it was a matter of professional judgement and therefore outside their remit to direct them to assess. When I have the energy I will escalate to the LGO... but I know that won't fix the ongoing issues.

I will spend a few days going through the draft then once finalised, will appeal. I am not expecting the draft to be solid enough to be of any use.

and a follow up question - should all provision specified in the assessment reports be included in the EHCP, or only that which is outside of the ordinarily available inclusive practice of the LA? Just playing the game of matching provision to need as our LA does not seem to set out the EHCP in an easy to read way!

Surely all of it.

In the parallel universe where "ordinary available" is well, "ordinarily available", they could just quickly the stuff they'd done couldn't they?

All special educational provision should be in F.

Should have said "Quickly tick the stuff..."

Interestingly the EP report states in the guidance "In (LA) we have provided guidance on quality first teaching expectation and examples of good practice in the Ordinarily Available Inclusive Practice Guide. It is expected that any provision identified will be over and above provision identified in this document"

Which suggests that anything within that document is not considered SEP as it is part of a (theoretically!) universal offer.

The term special educational provision is defined in section 21 of the Children and Families Act 2014. The LA doesn’t get to make up their own definition.

The definition is:
“Special educational provision”, for a child aged two or more or a young person, means educational or training provision that is additional to, or different from, that made generally for others of the same age in—
(a) mainstream schools in England,
(b) maintained nursery schools in England,
(c) mainstream post-16 institutions in England, or
(d) places in England at which relevant early years education is provided.
(2) “Special educational provision”, for a child aged under two, means educational provision of any kind.
(3) “Health care provision” means the provision of health care services as part of the comprehensive health service in England continued under section 1(1) of the National Health Service Act 2006.

It doesn’t say SEP is ‘educational or training provision that is additional to, or different from, that made generally for others of the same age except for where the SEP is also included in the LA’s Ordinarily Available Inclusive Practice Guide.'

When looking at what is SEP now, the reference point is what is provided in mainstream schools in England. You can also see this by looking at when it is legally necessary to issue an EHCP and case law surrounding when it is necessary to make an EHCP.

Thank you. I will add something else to my long list of complaints to be dealt with when I have the energy!

Hi all, this isn't EHCP related but section 19...my daughter has after 5 months out of school been offered a referral to a medical needs school, I'd previously told the LA this wasn't appropriate for her as it's a short term placement and even if she can engage, it's too short for her to be of any use...they accepted the referral this week, however they have said there is a waiting list, we have no idea where she is on the list and it's only a 6 week placement.

So no progress really, they have said she can have outreach if she can't attend but they'll only try for 6 weeks, which is unlikely to work.

Have a meeting with the LA and school next week, I want to push them to offer something else as they told me the first step was to apply for this school before anything else could be offered.

I know this isn't true and they're not applying the law properly but I just need some advice about what to ask for next.

However I'm aware that DD might not be able to engage with anything anyway so not sure if it's worth putting all my effort into taking this further when our EHCP draft is due next week anyway and not really sure what to ask for...I found lots of alternatives with the help of @BrightYellowTrain but they ignored all of those requests, just saying the only route was to apply for this school. I'm aiming for a mentor type provider or asking for an online provider so she can try engaging that way, demand free. She's starting to get bored now at home and has had good days (probably less good than bad) so I'd like to try to offer something to try on those days.

Anyone managed to get something out of LA and school with section 19? This could go on for months, I know the school is full in year 11 too and I work with kids at my school who have been waiting for months for year 11 as they tend to keep them longer once they get to that point.

@BrightYellowTrain Back to the issue of doing an AR so close to the hearing date, we definitely wouldn't want the tribunal to say we need to start a new appeal! Ugh.

If our current MS setting agrees to say that they cannot meet needs (they have indicated they will support us with this), is an AR or emergency review the only way for them to do this?

I guess I'm asking whether there is a less formal mechanism for the school to say this? Can it just be as part of the WD process?

@Icantpeopleanymore unfortunately, it often takes enforcement action. I would email the Director of Children’s Services, reminding them of their duty under s19 of the Education Act 1996 to ensure CSA pupils who are unable to attend school still receive a suitable full-time education. Go on to say this provision should already be in place and if the LA doesn’t offer a suitable education, you will be forced to pursue enforcement action including judicial review proceedings if necessary.

I would still continue to push for this because you may well have to appeal the EHCP. If DD isn’t ready for a full-time education in any form yet, it must be as much as she is able to cope with. What about some provision DD could pick up and put down in line with what and when she is able to do things?

I have secured s19 provision for my own DC and others.

@SpaceInvader321 the current MS can tell the LA they can’t meet needs now. The school can provide evidence of that for the appeal (appeals including section I will have information from the schools proposed by both sides). It wouldn’t be via the WD, that is between you and the LA.

Although the school saying they can’t meet needs doesn’t always mean they can’t/won’t be named. That has pros and cons for parents.

@BrightYellowTrain Thanks so much.

Although the school saying they can’t meet needs doesn’t always mean they can’t/won’t be named. That has pros and cons for parents.

I can't imagine the LA will insist that we stay at this school as there's so much evidence that it's not working for DC, but I know the LA is not necessarily going to be reasonable!

I have asked the LA if they've consulted with any other schools but not had an answer. It would be nice to know which school they'll be proposing as an alternative to the one we prefer. Still waiting for SENDIST to confirm the amended grounds of the appeals, so I suppose they'll give the LA some time to respond. I guess that might mean we won't know their choice of school possibly for another month or so? Am I right that they can only choose one alternative to argue for in the tribunal? It's not as if we'll need to be prepared to argue against every possible alternative, is it?

I think we are going to be declined, I don’t see it is possible to keep to the timeline if they don’t let me know the decision until 16weeks? 15 days for my draft, 15 days for the school to respond, that only leave 2 days to issue a final ehcp? Is this really how they work?

Pretty much @Cinnamoncupcake. At least that was how ours was.

@Cinnamoncupcake if the LA is going to issue an EHCP, in order to finalise by week 20, they should send a draft by week 14. However, just because they don’t, doesn’t mean they aren’t going to issue. The LA could finalise within 2 days.

@SpaceInvader321 it may be even longer than a month. I would start collating evidence regarding any school that might be on the LA’s radar. The earlier you start, the easier it will be. Even once the LA has proposed a school, it isn’t uncommon for them to change their mind at the last minute. For example, if the parent proposes an independent SS and the LA originally proposes a MS, it isn’t uncommon for them to propose a state SS at the last minute. It is all about game playing. SENDIST doesn’t have to consider a fall-back option from the LA.

@Phineyj @BrightYellowTrain i think I’m just getting nervous now I’m at 15 weeks and haven’t heard anything, I really can’t send her to school unless a ehcp is in place because there is to much she needs support with to be able to cope. The timescales towards the end seems really rushed especially after how long we wait to get to this stage.

That's understandable. @BrightYellowTrain will know for sure, but this is the time you can send one of Ipsea's template letters of complaint, suitably adjusted, to the Director of Children's Services isn't it? I did that when our LA was about to miss deadlines both times.

At least then they know you're keeping count!

Is the provision specified in section F based on what is needed to get to Outcomes in E, or based on how to address the needs identified in B? There seems to be a gap between B and E!

Yes @Cinnamoncupcake, send IPSEA’s model letter like @Phineyj said.

@handmademitlove there is a golden thread that runs through the EHCP. Provision in F is to meet the needs in B. Each need should have corresponding provision in F. The provision in F should help the child or young person achieve the outcomes in E because the outcomes are a result of provision.

That is what I thought. I was confused by the statement "This section sets out a list of the outcomes sought for the child/young person and the provisions sought for the child/young person to meet these outcomes"

Which suggests the provision is written based on what outcomes are needed, rather than that the outcomes are a consequence of the provision... They are part of the SEND change programme and I wonder if this is the new template?

@handmademitlove they are all interlinked in the golden thread so in that sense the statement isn’t untrue. 9.68 of the SENCOP states “EHC plans must specify the special educational provision required to meet each of the child or young person’s special educational needs. The provision should enable the outcomes to be achieved.”

Ok. So I’m finishing off my EHCP amendments this weekend. After my complaint about provision to the school, 2 things have dropped off again. 1) he is not sent to the toilet so holds it in all day. 2) he has not read his reading book with an adult (this was in proposed provision).
Therefore, in section F I’m detailing these two provisions (amongst others) in the format

1. Provision 2) Who with 3) How often 4) Monitoring and review Am I being too specific about toileting? Parents were invited to a class lesson on Friday, and whilst it was lovely - I noticed that, of the three adults in the classroom, no one sat near DS. He and his friend - who also has an EHCP - were sitting together with no support. A child with no EHCP but more extreme behavioural needs had adult support. I ‘get’ this, but if these means that quiet DS doesn’t go to toilet, or his other quiet friend with an EHCP doesn’t take an important food supplement - that’s not right? I told the Mum to get that written in Section F. And with the £500. I think it’s wrong. DP thinks it’s an attempt to silence me, and wants to know if it impacts future legal action if they still don’t follow the law. I did wonder about donating it to a local hall who do activities with SEND families and has been a very special place for DS and his friend. But I’ll carefully look through the terms and wording of the offer

So any advice on..

1. are LA likely to accept something as specific as send DS to the toilet in Section F?
2. how can I get the school to realise I’m not being a nag (I’m hoping this will help when Section F is finalised)?
3. does acceptance of the £500 impact future legal proceedings?

This is draft amended EHCP 2. They stated draft EHCP 1 (that I previously spent a weekend amending) was sent in error. Draft 2 had some updates (including mine) but will still not right. They put in : who with, frequency and duration (but not monitoring and review) in the first bit of Section F only, but not the other sections (cognition and learning etc). They hadn’t looked at the Section F appendix I wrote.