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

@Macramepotholder Regarding phase transfers, I helped a friend file their refusal to assess appeal a few weeks ago for a child going into y10 in September. SENDIST registered the appeal within a week and my friend was given a September 2025 hearing date.

@SpaceInvader321 refusal to assess appeals are different. They are heard on the papers (unless there is a significant compelling reason for them not be) so are heard markedly quicker whatever the age of the child or young person. Y9 to Y10 is not a phase transfer.

@Macramepotholder I didn’t realise you were in a phase transfer year. It is worth asking for an earlier hearing, although it isn’t always agreed for phase transfer appeals that don’t include section I. Expedited phase transfer appeals are usually held in the summer term or early in the autumn term (there is not enough capacity to hear all before the start of term).

Oh thanks, I'll give that a go. I said I was happy for it to be heard on the papers (in the grand scheme of things this probably ranks as a very minor appeal and could be done on the papers really easily), so that might speed it up a little more.

@Macramepotholder unless it is a cut and dried case, it is riskier to have a content appeal heard on the papers.

@Macramepotholder @BrightYellowTrain Sorry! I thought moving from ks3 to ks4 and starting GCSEs was considered a phase transfer. (I didn't go through the British school system myself, so still learning!)

Phases are defined on the Ipsea doc linked below. It all seems a bit eccentric as infant and junior are so often with the same institution and there are hardly any middle schools these days, whereas moving into GCSE and from GCSE to sixth form (even if within the same institution) is definitely a big change, but that's the definition. The GCSE picture is muddied by many schools starting the courses in year 9, especially in Maths and Science, meaning ideally a school change would take place at the beginning of year 9 and not the end.

www.ipsea.org.uk/moving-to-a-new-phase-of-education-with-an-ehc-plan

@SpaceInvader321 KS3 to KS4 is a change of key stage, but not a phase transfer. Similar to a child in reception in a primary school moving to Y1 changes from Early Years Foundation Stage to KS1, but it is not a phase transfer.

Infants to juniors is only a phase transfer where the child is in an infant school. It isn’t a phase transfer when a child is in a primary school where infants and juniors are in the same school.

DC can move outside of the phase transfer years via the AR process, an early review, or reassessment of needs, so if they need to move for Y9 or Y10, they can. Although the LA may force parents to appeal.

Is it correct that KS4 to KS5 doesn't count as a phase transfer, even though it's common to change school then?

Bonkers if so!

@Phineyj secondary to post 16 is always a phase transfer year. The deadline is 31st March though not 15th Feb.

I do think it is pretty cut and dried. LA refused to consult as requested. They could not provide a rationale for this refusal. We provided evidence ourselves, they didn't use it or make the provision. All documented in email chains. So I'm not hugely worried, if we wait for the in person hearing it will be AR time anyway...

Oh I see. It's really an "institution transfer" then not a "phase transfer".

I think also @Macramepotholder that like me you are confident you can put a good case forward in writing.

It's really an "institution transfer"

Not really. Despite what some LAs sometimes try to get away with, if DC is in a phase transfer year, the phase transfer deadline applies even if DC remains at the existing placement e.g. transfer from primary to secondary in an all through school or moving to sixth form within the same school. And conversely, a child may move schools following the e.g. Y10 AR, but that wouldn’t make it a phase transfer year.

The risk with a paper hearing is more than just whether someone can write an articulate case or not.

Oh gosh, see this is why it's so difficult to understand without expert advice. I would never have interpreted that Ipsea guidance to mean (for instance) that KS4 to KS5 within a school would be a "phase transfer". That is v useful to know though as that's the age group I teach.

I felt that on the papers worked for us but that's all I can say having done it once.

Yep, my job is literally putting good cases forward in the face of government bureaucracy. I'm confident.

Now if anyone can tell me how to actually get the LA to book in the OT that's supposedly their responsibility...

They managed to book in the OT for us but she was pretty useless tbh.

I emailed the OT service directly.

@Macramepotholder if the OT provision is detailed, specified and quantified in F but isn’t being provided, email the DCS threatening JR for breach of s42 CFA 2014. If that doesn’t work, you need a pre-action letter. SOSSEN can provide this FOC although there is a wait, so you may wish to look elsewhere. Then, if that fails, JR proceedings will resolve the situation.

I'll try that, thanks, they're also not replying to the SENCO. Did you see the thing about the LA changing their AR practices in what appears to be a dubious way?

@Macramepotholder other LAs have tried proposing that change. So much so IPSEA made a page on it. That blanket policy isn’t lawful.

No, I haven't. Although forewarned is forearmed, thank you.

It’s 4am, and yesterdays latest episode is on my mind - so hope it’s ok to have a rant here!
So I got EHCP draft amended V2 (although this actually the third version) on Friday.
Had a quick look through yesterday and they haven’t included a section about SALT provision, lunchtime support and support during school trips.
So they emailed back. Apparently both the school SENCO and case worker thought he’d been discharged from SALT services. He hasn’t. The case worker even stated to me ‘I have had confirmation that DS’s needs can be met from ordinarily available provision’.
But this isn’t true. SALT actually contacted her about the same time she sent the email to say he hasn’t been discharged. I then got an email back saying ‘sorry for the confusion’.
Surely this is v basic, fundamental stuff?? I’m also surprised the non-teaching SENCO doesn’t know this and I think she probably advised the case worker.
SALT provision is vital for him. I then got a reassuring email from his speech therapist.
And then lunchtime support - they’ll include.
school trips - they say something about wording/risk assessments in Section F, but not the provision/how often/staffing format I annotated.
Only DS was left to his own devices on a school trip last year, only for a parent to notice he was wandering around lost and took him under her wing…

@RibbyJumper DD has it written in her EHCP that all off-site / off timetable visits require an individual risk assessment and consultation with parents regarding provision and supervision. She also has an agreed off-site safety plan which details what trip leaders have to consider and minimum provision eg one to one, safe quiet space if overwhelmed.

@handmademitlove

Thank you! Yes I will push for this and I’m going to use some of your wording there when I annotate (again).
I can do see they have removed my wording of ‘qualified’ and substituted with ‘allocated’.

@RibbyJumper my EP amendments were mostly rejected regarding wording. EPs boss said they didn't feel that being too specific was necessary or appropriate 😮

I did ask the case worker why it was my job to ensure that all needs had associated provision, and that all provision was detailed, specified and quantified given that they were the commissioner for the reports, surely they should have a minimum standard of "meets the code of practice guidance"? She said they were not experts and couldn't be expected to check professional reports.... 🤦 Didn't see the irony at all in asking me to do this instead...

@handmademitlove

I’m just aghast. I did quote the law (nicely) to his case worker in an email - and what is expected in Section F.
It’s this thread plus IPSEA that has given me the knowledge I need.
I understand caseload, funding etc is an issue, but surely caseworkers (and their bosses) are trained to have that knowledge of the law before they write an EHCP? And SENCO’s before they input.

The ‘I have had confirmation that DS has been discharged’ when he hasn’t, is just - well I want to say ‘basic incompetence’, but it also feels like a downright lie.