Alternative provision funding

[Ricecakesaremyjam]

DS is 5, diagnosed ASD and ADHD, in mainstream primary reception class with 1:1 but on a heavily reduced timetable and only allowed in school for 2hrs a day.
I have just discovered his funding level means he could and should be accessing alternative provision. School were very happy to not tell me about this and basically keep his funding.
I have asked about speech therapy or play therapy being a good use of his funding, and have said I am happy for this to take place at home or I can drive him to a therapist centre etc.
Am expecting the head/SENCO to have an excuse for why this can’t happen.
Does anyone have experience of alternative provision funding being used for their child who is unable to access school full time and whether it can be used in this way?
Thanks x

Whether a child should be receiving alternative provision isn’t about what funding is attached to the child’s EHCP. Whoever has told you that has misunderstood.

DS is entitled to attend school full time. The school is unlawfully, informally excluding DS. You don’t have to allow that to continue, If you want him to attend full time, he can unless the school formally suspends.

Currently, although the LA has the power to make alternative provison for DS, they do not have a duty to at the moment because DS is not compulsory school age until next term. The LA’s duty to ensure DC unable to attend school full-time only applies to CSA pupils and DS is not CSA until next term. Even next term, AP is unlikely to include SALT and play therapy.

Are speech therapy and play therapy in section F of DS’s EHCP? They should be if they are required.

Hi @StrivingForSleep 👋🏻
He has so many social communication and interaction interventions listed in Section F that I would have thought play therapy and SLT would be a good use of his funding?
DS receives top level funding to fund all day 1:1 support in school so would this funding that school have already received for him be able to be used for interventions for the time he is not in school? his case worker has confirmed he has received this funding and it is school’s responsibility to be organising alternative provision for when he’s not onsite.

It is not about what you or anyone else thinks would be a good use of funding. It is about what is detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP. If SALT and play therapy (or other interventions) are not detailed, specified and quantified in F, they do not have to be provided. Focus on the provision detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP rather than the funding.

Don’t believe everything the LA tells you. They will tell you what they want you to know and their version of the law. The LA is not telling you the truth. The school must not unlawfully, informally exclude DS and if they did formally suspend, they would be responsible for education (After the first 5 days, they would be responsible for alternative provision, although this wouldn’t usually be SALT or play therapy. For the first 5 days, where AP isn’t provided, the school should take reasonable steps to set and mark work but again this wouldn’t usually involve SALT and play therapy.) but it is not the school’s responsibility to provide provision for DS if he is unable to attend school full-time. Once he is CSA, that duty would lie with the LA as per section 19 of the Education Act 1996.