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

@Wednesdayy123 after the draft consent order has been sent to SENDIST you wait the consent order to be issued. The LA has 5 weeks from the date of the Order to finalise the amended EHCP. Too early to chase or expect contact from the school and the additional provision doesn’t yet have to be provided.

Thanks it all makes sense now! recieved an order last week- hearing is vacated and Judge is considering the request for a consent order.

@Wednesdayy123 while you wait for the consent order, the LA should start to set the wheels in motion, but they have 5 weeks from the Consent Order to finalise.

So - I had an email from the Local Authority on Friday saying they were going to visit DC’s school regarding concerns over what happened in regards to DS’s EHCP.

Why immediate reaction was WTAF - and now I’m tiptoeing across the playground avoiding any eye contact with the Head and SENCO.
So any ideas what this will involve???

Could be anything. Sounds like the LA is trying to pass the buck and potentially cover their tracks.

@BrightYellowTrain Thank you so much for all of your advice throughout this process. Consent order was issued this afternoon!

@Wednesdayy123 Hurrah! You are welcome.

@BrightYellowTrain

I can see that this is ultimately the responsibility of the LA, but what if the school isn’t ‘playing ball’ and tries to get what it can in terms of funding??

From your posts on this thread and others, that really isn’t happening. Schools don’t get funding for SEP that isn’t in F, and the LA doesn’t include provision in F that isn’t legally reasonably required.

@BrightYellowTrain

DS’s first EHCP was incredibly woolly and had no indication of provision/staffing/frequency etc. I had very little knowledge at the time, so agreed to the EHCP - mainly because I wanted it in place before he started reception.

His original reception placement school (from mainstream application) was going to state ‘cannot meet needs’ based on certain wording in the EHCP. I didn’t realise this could happen,

The school asked for more funding.
So last year DS was on 29hours per week - approx £16000?? I think?

Then I saw the provision map that the school had sent to the LA requesting funding. But DS was absolutely not receiving that provision.

So if a school needs to overstate, that means there is no clarity between the school/parent/LA??

It feels to me like the school has ‘weaponised’ their choice to state ‘cannot meet needs’ to get more funding???

I think we have discussed this previously.

For non-wholly independent schools, the parent’s preference must be named 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.

The bar to do this is high. Higher than many LAs and schools admit.

However, responses to consults have more nuance than you are imagining. Schools raising concerns during consultations made during the EHCP process isn’t uncommon and aren’t exclusions. Sometimes the objections aren’t even about the individual child.

The provision map is a red herring in relation to funding, the school wouldn’t have got funding for provision on the provision map because in wasn’t in F.

Yes. But I still don’t get it maybe??

So school stated setting was unsuitable because DS used a PECS book, and staff had no training.

His preschool (where DS had no additional funding) knew how to use PECS and had widgets up everywhere.

The bar is high (lawfully), but - at the time - I would have (potentially) been compliant and gone with the professional decision - believing the child’s best interest were at heart - and not funding.

The school’s objection in the consultation was probably because staff needed training but the EHCP failed to include that, the EHCP failed to include adequate staff time to enable PECS to be used properly, &/or the funding was inadequate to enable the provision. That is part of a legitimate response to a consultation. If the LA then used this consultation response in order not to name your preferred placement, that is a problem with the LA, not necessarily the school’s response to the consultation. What the LA should have done was ensure the EHCP was lawful and there was appropriate funding.

Preschools are very different places.

Hmm. They did get more funding, I believe there was PECS training, but the PECS book was abandoned after about a month. He’d been using it successfully until he started mainstream.

I don’t know, I do see the SENCO’s role as ensuring appropriate support and learning plans are in place. The SENCO did write a provision map in July 24, but told me the class teacher ‘didn’t need to see it’ when I questioned what support he was getting in December. And I do think there needs to be more accountability there.

When the SENCO was incorrectly telling the case worker that DS had been discharged from speech services, the case worker didn’t know who the speech therapist was - so I do think the school should have helped more/given/known the right info. They have the direct contact with the speech therapist. DS was supposed to be seen this term, but this will now be happening next term.

The school SENCO, case worker and parent all need to work together. I am relying on my gut feeling, but the SENCO has been the least communicative and least proactive out of us all. I’m also still reeling by her comments on reports that he has ‘a tiny squeaky voice’ and ‘just sits there’. There are so many better ways comments like that can be written.

And I wondered how you are @BrightYellowTrain, if ok to ask? It sounded like you had a difficult time a few weeks ago. Hope you are ok x

@RibbyJumper the school didn’t get random extra funding, though. They got more funding for the PECS provision, which should have been properly provided for to begin with. If provision detailed, specified and quantified in F wasn’t being provided, that is a separate point to the funding/consultation response.

I am OK, thank you. DS1 has complex needs, so it is our normal. I don’t normally mention it on this thread. I only did so to explain it definitely wasn’t me you spoke to.

@BrightYellowTrain

I know. But to be honest, I’m completely f-ed off with it all and trying to do the right thing. I don’t care if I’m wrong, annoying or generally pissing people off. If it means DS is noticed, but people hate me for it - fine.

SENCO has emailed me to ask permission for an OT referral. Yes! I tried that two years ago and got nowhere… First proactive communication I’ve had for ages, so maybe the LA involvement has helped.

Hi all, hope everyone is battling on!

I've had a very busy few days but sort of productive. I've been fed up, disheartened and very overwhelmed and tearful at times but I'm just trying to put my big girl pants on and get on with it.

Draft ehcp was sent to a local advocate who has given me some advice, I've been asking lots of questions on Facebook groups and I'm working through it with the help of various webinars etc. he's a friend and is an assistant principal at a mainstream but did work in sen, has Sen children and is the senco, plus does EHCP work. I'd rather not spend loads on it currently so I can save for appeal. He said it seems written to suggest specialist so far, which she won't attend anyway, but he felt if they got that EHCP at his mainstream, they would have to say they couldn't meet need.

I know it doesn't mean the LA won't name her current school anyway but I'll just have to deal with it as it happens. I'm resigned to appeal now and paying for private reports, no idea if DD could manage to engage with them but it's worth a try. I've got time to find the right people.

Have made comprehensive notes and asked for a meeting with the caseworker.

Main issues are, there's no provision for progression into adulthood on the EHCP at all. Can I ask the EP to add an addendum to state what these provisions would be?

They didn't let me consult or ask for the input of SALT, even though the ep report does suggest communication and language issues. I'll tell them it's clear they should have asked for that, so I'm requesting it. However I know they don't and I wouldn't want to expose DD to a useless SALT assessment anyway, I'll get my own.

There's no provision in health, but she has a diagnosis and fatigue and pain are huge issues which are a barrier to education. Physically and mentally. I've no idea why there isn't anything there.

They ignored my letter from a consultant diagnosing her HSD and stating the difficulties.

The provision isn't taken from needs in the report, just copied from the provision bits the EP stated , but there's lots more need in the LA EP report that has no provision in the EHCP.

Caseworker tried saying it's only a precis of needs and provisions, not everything will be included...I disagree, otherwise what is the actual point of it being in the reports? And it's a legal document, surely it needs to have all the provision otherwise it's not enforceable? Not sure if anyone with more knowledge can tell me where I'd find that to state to the caseworker?

Also lots of stupid statements about needed provisions like canine assisted therapy...devised by a qualified teacher and delivered by a TA. Bollocks to that. She needs a trained therapist, which the EP report states!

Also the senco at her current school said they definitely can't meet need, even with the very poor draft. So if I can get it to be more specific then I'll go back and say there's no point naming a school, it's a waste of time and resources. I've put together a personal budget, added lots of things to it, thank you @BrightYellowTrain for suggestions.

Going in with no shit taken attitude and I'll see what happens.

Fully expecting a shitty draft to turn into a shitty final, but that's ok, I'll get straight on with appealing.

In the meantime, final EHCP day is also the first day back after the holiday, so no schools will be consulted... meeting with the LA arranged by school to tell them I'll be pushing for section 19 again if they don't sort the EHCP and once that's in place they have to adhere to it, if she's not in school what is the position then? It's a separate meeting, the third we will have had, where they keep saying she can't have anything but a local medical needs school. I've been told off the record there's a lot of self harming behaviour and the kids are escorted to the toilets to make sure they don't do it there.. no way am I sending her into that, she's got history of falling in with the crowd and copying behaviour along with self harm. Not happening.

I'm going to email the head of children's services to say I want someone with decision making ability there at the meeting, and my caseworker. I'm not taking any more shite. They've offered a reintegration to school outreach, with a 6 week limit, at a school that also can't meet her needs and it's not full time or suitable education, so I'll be telling them they need to sort that out.

They are well over the 20 week deadline and they changed dates on the paperwork too, by over a month to pretend it was a later parent request.

I have after discussion with various people and lots of reading decided that I'd rather just send amendments and get the final EHCP even if they've not added them and then just push them to give her some provision whilst I wait for appeal.

I hope I'm doing the right thing but I feel relieved slightly that I've just made a decision. The caseworker is either very clever at delaying and being useless to waste my time, or monumentally stupid, I don't know which, so I'd rather just crack on with the next level as it were. It's inevitable they're going to try to name a school which won't work, so they can try if they want. I won't be sending her and I won't be putting her through it not working out with them trying to integrate her, not unless it were perfect and she wanted to.

If it comes to it I will try getting her some English and maths resources from the online school we liked to get her to try and will just try to keep her ticking over, whist she's starting to get bored, but the wait won't do any harm, she's still recovering and her dad told her at the weekend that he's moving away in the summer, so she needs time to get used to that too. Plus we have ongoing health issues to get to grips with. Animal crossing and baking are enough for now, plus I've found a local dog owner who we are going to help out with dog sitting one day a week and the odd walk, which is therapeutic in itself, for both of us.

Tits out and chin up I guess. Grr! 😂 I'll probably be having a sob on the way to work in the morning again but for now I'm angry

@Icantpeopleanymore don’t worry about DD struggling to engage with independent assessments. You would be amazed at what a good professional can glean even if DC struggle to engage.

Yes, an EP can add an addendum. PfA provision can also be covered by other professionals, such as OT and social care.

All special educational needs should be in B and all special educational provision reasonably required should be in F. All needs must have corresponding SEP in F. This is stated in 9.69 of the SENCOP and underpinned by reg 12 of the SEND Regs 2014 and section 37 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

Do you have that in writing from the current SENCO?

The LA can still consult over the Easter holiday. There isn’t an exemption for that.

Thank you @BrightYellowTrain that's really helpful.

I'll state that to the caseworker. She can't get away with saying not all the provision needs to be in, just because it's headed in the end psychologist report as 'kent mainstream core standards, which includes but is not limited to' can she? I think they're saying that's just quality first teaching...but some things in there are for example EAA, uniform changes for sensory needs, visual timetables, written information broken down...do they need to be in F? Or not because they're covered by a mainstream education (in theory!)

Also though there's needs like small, calm, quiet environment...can that be a provision?

I don't have it in writing but I can ask her to do that. Would it help to take that to the meeting with the caseworker?

I guess they can consult...are they likely to get any responses though?

I'll try to find the right professionals, that's the next job once this bit is over.

I'll ask for an addendum from the EP.

And when I email director of children's services I'll threaten JR too. Which is the one I can get legal aid for DD for? But not for a pre action protocol letter?

It should be all needs and all special educational provision. The definition of SEP is set out in section 21 of the Children and Families Act 2014. It states:
“”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.”
Things like visual uniform adjustments, info broke down etc. can be in F. The environment that is required can also be special educational provision in F.

You should follow up all verbal conversations with emails. It may not help in your meeting but it will provide you with evidence later down the line.

Schools should still have someone able to respond during the Easter holiday.

Yes, DD can be eligible for legal aid in their own name for (most) JR proceedings but the pre-action letter would be in your name so legal aid is only possible if you are eligible (which I don’t think you are from your posts).

Thank you @BrightYellowTrain no I don't think I would be, I'm a head of department and been teaching 23 years so I earn ok.

I think she's trying to say it's provision for all, the things that aren't stated as provisions, so not SEN. Which I don't agree with. I know that's they way they're trying to frame it now in Kent where it's quality first teaching and not specifically for Sen children, but I'll take that to the meeting. It's on teams. I'll ask to have it recorded, I'll take notes and I'll follow up with an email.

And yes, there should be someone to respond, but I just think they'll use the holiday as a delay. There's no penalty for going over the time limit is there?

I need the break too to be honest, I need to be able to switch off from it all.

Things like uniform adjustments etc. are provision additional to, or different from, that made generally for others of the same age in mainstream. Although they are also reasonable adjustments that should be made under the Equality Act 2010.

The school should not use it as an excuse not to respond and the LA cannot use a lack of response as a reason to delay finalising. There’s no penalty. Since they are already over the timescale, you can threaten JR and go down that route alongside doing the same of s19 provision. You could complain and then escalate to the LGO.

Hi - I've just got my DD's draft plan and I'm trying to make my way through it with my highlighters. She's autistic and an ambulatory wheelchair user at 6th form college, so much of the advice I've read so far doesn't seem to apply (as great as it is!).I'm wary and need to make sure I'm not missing anything for her as she already has so much trauma and emotional damage from medical intervention, educational settings that don't and won't even try to support her and her ongoing medical needs.

Can I ask what the difference is between a Key Worker and an LSA? Her plan talks about them both in 1:1 ratios for various intervention sessions and also that she should have access to a Key Worker to support her safe and inclusive access to the setting. It says how much and how often she should have access to the key worker should be advised by the health professionals and the Children's Therapy Team.........but her Neurosurgeon will have zero interest in this and Children's Services have already completed their evidence report stating she doesn't meet the criteria for care?

How would you respond? Any help much appreciated

Terms such as key-worker, LSA, TA etc. are often used interchangeably. That is why it is also important training/qualifications/experience are included. And why the support they will provide is detailed in F.

‘Access to’ is too vague. The provision needs to be detailed, specified and quantified. Not left for someone to decide in the future. Professional time for input and reviews etc. needs to be accounted for. Provision detailed, specified and quantified in F must be provided. Ultimately, it is the LA who is responsible, but sometimes the NHS will provide the provision even when DC wouldn’t otherwise meet their criteria.

Check therapies are in F. LAs often try to put them in G. And don’t forget preparation for adulthood (PfA) provision.