EHCP support thread no. 5

[Needlenardlenoo]

Another thread is nearly filled so here is a new one for when we need it. I am the original OP but have name-changed due to admin (let's call it spring cleaning). We got our EHCP finally in June last year and are in a state of cautious optimism two terms into the year 7 transition. There has been no contact from the LA at all to us, but perhaps no news is good news, sometimes. The next challenge is going to be the annual review. I am feeling a bit paranoid the LA might try a cease to maintain. Anyway, onwards and upwards and best wishes to all!

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
EHCP support thread no. 4 -
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/5197351-ehcp-support-thread-no-4

As ever thatsnotmygarden just wow, thankyou, I will literally print your message out and have it next to me as I go through it.
Thankyou so so much.

I'm not quite clear on the timeline and order for what happens next in the process.

The caseworker said DS's case would go to panel, we presume this will be once his draft is created.

When the draft comes to us from the LA, will it have a setting type named in section I or will that only happen in the Final? At what point do they add the name of the school that has said yes to meeting needs?

What happens if they issue a Final in the summer hols before they have had chance to consult with any schools?

If no new setting is agreed by Sept (I agree with you, the LA appears to be taking its sweet time as per) will DS automatically remain at current school (who said they can't meet needs) during some of Y11 - even though section I may say 'specialist' as that is presumably the settings they will be consulting with?

I am in such a tangle with it all. DS keeps asking what's going to happen. Not easy for any teen to not know what school they will be at in Sept never mind one with ASD and other SEND.

We are in talks with a school we are going to ask LA to consult with. Looks promising but not counting chickens just yet.

Following the review meeting:
The report must be circulated within 2 weeks.
The LA must inform you if they propose to amend or not within 4 weeks, and if they do, send you the proposed amendments at the same time.
If the LA is going to amend, they must then finalise within a further 8 weeks, so a maximum of 12 weeks total from the review meeting.

A draft must not name a placement or type of placement. Section I must be blank. Placements/types of placement would be in the final (or not in the case of EOTIS). The LA shouldn’t finalise without consulting.

If the current school is still named in the EHCP in September (whether that is because the LA hasn’t finalised an amended version or because the LA says they will maintain as is or they have finalised an amendment but not amended section I) DS will remain on the roll of the current school. While ever the current school is named, the type of placement will be mainstream.

Hi, so me again (sadly). I just called our school of choice. It’s a mainstream free school (An independent, publicly-funded school) and their admissions says they accept any child with an EHCP. I’ve spoken to their lovely Senco who says they are full for September. Their PAN is tiny (56) and she said even with an EHCP naming the school he’d go on a waiting list and wouldn’t be near the top, though would be bumped up with an EHCP. I’m so gutted, I’ve just had a two year fight and now looks like I’d need another one?

The school’s SENCO has misinformed you.

If the school is named in section I, they must admit. They can be forced to, including via JR if necessary, if they try to refuse. You do not need to sit on the waiting list.

If it is a free school, it can be named even if they object because they are not wholly independent. Being at PAN on its own wouldn’t be a lawful reason for the LA to refuse to name your preference. The LA would have to prove the school is so full admitting DS is incompatible with the efficient education for others or efficient use of resources. The bar for this is higher than many LAs admit. It has to be something tangible and specific and is more than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”.

thatsnotmygarden thankyou. I was so sure I had checked all of this before even going down this process. But people everywhere tell me if its full its full and they don't have to take him. I'm just broken.

Take a breath. You can do this.

But people everywhere tell me if its full its full and they don't have to take him.

Ignore. A school being ‘full’ does not automatically mean placing DC there is incompatible. A school being over PAN doesn’t always mean the LA can prove incompatibility either. As per section 43 of the Children and Families Act 2014, the school must admit if they are named.

Even in ICS cases, the Regulations (The School Admissions (Infant Class Sizes) (England) Regulations 2012 if you are interested) mean DC with EHCPs naming the school who are placed after the normal admission round are excepted pupils.

Thankyou x

Would I be able to try and amend my B and F appeal to now also appeal against section I? Or is that not possible?

In the last two EHCP reviews, the LA mostly (but not fully) agreed to the amendments school was seeking and included these in the working document.

As I am still awaiting the tribunal hearing, are the LA still meant to send you a formal letter saying they’ll agree to amend or not amend, as I know this gives you the right of appeal. I’m aware that this is a grey area in terms of an amended final being issued, but I’m not sure if you’re still meant to receive a formal decision letter.

You can submit a SEND7 to request to amend the grounds of appeal. Don’t forget to seek the LA’s views first. Be aware if your new hearing date is soon, it may result in the hearing being pushed back.

ARs during live appeals is an area LAs are being allowed to act as they wish with impunity. Judge McConnell said she expected LAs to issue a decision notice (which if the decision was to maintain as is or cease to maintain would normally come with the right of appeal but wouldn’t yet give you the right of appeal if they proposed to amend - that would come with the final.) but not issue an amended finalised EHCP, with proposed amendments being feeding into the WD process instead. What is happening in practice isn’t consistent and LAs are being allowed to act as they wish in this respect. Sometimes LAs are issuing decision notices. Sometimes they aren’t. Sometimes they are issuing amended finalised versions. Sometimes they are not. Where amended finalised versions have been issued, SENDIST is making some submit fresh appeals because it supersedes the EHCP subject to appeal. Sometimes these are then consolidated, but not always. Yet other times, SENDIST is allowing the exact same circumstances to be incorporated as part of the existing live appeal without a fresh appeal being submitted.

How long can a council consult with schools for? It's been 6 months now and none have said they can meet needs. Our request from the beginning was eotis, as we didn't feel a school would be possible, although would have been delighted to be proved wrong. He hasn't had any education for the whole school year, as he was out of school before the ehcp was granted. The 6 months before that were mostly reduced hours or not going in at all too. I don't really understand what our next steps are, or if we have rights to go to a tribunal for eotis during the consultation stage.

It depends on the situation.

In your situation, with a couple of exceptions, LAs must finalise within 20 weeks of your EHCNA request. They can consult schools within that time frame. Have they finalised (but also continued to consult)? When the LA finalise is when you get the right of appeal. If the LA has finalised, when did they do that and what, if anything, is in section I?

Separate from the EHCP process, the LA has a duty to ensure DS receives a suitable full-time education. Have you requested alternative provision? And if the LA has already finalised the EHCP, they are responsible for anything detailed, specified and quantified in F.

@thatsnotmygarden they issued the ehcp in January. They named mainstream, as they have to put someone, but then did the consulting. I believe 8 schools have said they can't meet needs and all of them took more than 15 days. Or at least the council took more than 15 days to tell us.

We tried to mediate over the content, as it doesn't include all of their EP recommendations, but they refused, so tribunal paperwork has been submitted. But that tribunal is just for the content.

He is still on roll at the mainstream school, although not attending, so dp asked the school for section 19 provision. They have said they will get back to us, but that it is unusual to be asked after so much time.

You can send a SEND7 to request to include section I in the appeal and request an expedited hearing on the basis DS is out of education. Don’t forget to seek the LA’s views first.

It is the LA who is responsible for ensuring DS receives a suitable full-time education and anything detailed, specified and quantified in F. Email the Director of Children’s Services. IPSEA has letters you can use. Post back here for next steps if the LA brushes you off.

We have a tribunal date in April 2026 for an in-person hearing appealing B&F. I am looking forward to the LA response though I expect I will be disappointed! Pretty sure they will just say "Our OT service provider said she doesn't need an assessment". Though I was interested to discover that when asking OT for advice and recommendations for the EHCNA, the LA did not provide any information that was included in the request, simply a name and date of birth - so they cannot possibly respond to the concerns as they haven't seen them.

What do other LAs do? I had assumed that the LA would send the information relating to why parents think an OT assessment is necessary?

I had assumed that the LA would send the information relating to why parents think an OT assessment is necessary

Often not, no.

If you have or get an independent OT assessment, don’t be surprised if at some point during the Tribunal process the LA seeks their own OT evidence.

Sorry to hear that so many of you are still facing uphill battles and lengthy waits 😔

Update from me.... After the EP who (actually sounded like a pretty good one) was originally assigned DD's case advised that she be reassigned as he only did online assessments and recommended she be seen face-to-face, DD was re-assigned fairly quickly...

However, before I was actually informed of this, I had a missed call and voicemail from the new EP stating that she "had some last-minute availability" and so had already seen DD that day in school.

I spoke to her today and tbh found her a little patronising and very much 'computer says no'. She can't send me the report before/when she sends it to the case-worker. I literally have to wait until it's all gone to the panel and they make a decision. She can't recommend DD be assessed/seen by other professionals even if she thinks there is a need (and I definitely got the impression she did re OT) - the best thing she can do in her report is recommend that the school/parents ask for a referral on NHS. She was very much "We are just a service commissioned to do this one review", not looking at the joined-up picture at all. She was also very dismissive of certain academic niggles I had, saying that she hadn't fully assessed DD, but that the teachers had said DD was working at expected levels and therefore everything was fine.

Compared to HCPs we've previously spoken to and the previous EP, I also don't feel as though she completely got it.

I made an official complaint about the LA's refusal to seek advice from other professionals, rebutted at stage one, I escalated it to stage two (in April) - hadn't heard anything so at the beginning of the month chased it up. Got a holding reply and still nothing... It's as if they want a decision on whether or not to issue to be made first 🤔

Oh, and DD's caseworker is currently on annual leave and has said she has left DD's case with a colleague who will take it to panel. And not left me with a name nor contact details.

Ah, another EP who needs reminding of GDPR. I would email her and the LA again - if you don’t know who to email, email the DCS. Even if they don’t reply, they will pass it on.

@thatsnotmygarden Thanks for your reply. It's been a while since I've done any GDPR training - do you mean that as she is holding personal data on DD, she is legally required to send it to us? She said that they used to be able to send the reports to parents, but now they can't...

Because what if something she writes in the report is inaccurate?

Would you quote the GDPR? I already think I annoyed her by referring in passing to the LA acting unlawfully. Eurgh. She just didn't come across very empathetic or emotionally engaged at all.

@thatsnotmygarden Is it only a breach of the GDPR if the LA withholds the report? So the EP doesn't need to send it to us, but the LA does?

At this point I would approach the EP and LA again less formally than quoting GDPR to them. The EP themselves can send it to you. It is DD’s data and you are entitled to it. Sadly, they may force you to go down the SAR route - even that might be quicker than waiting for the LA to get it to you.

I had my Key Stage Transfer review
yesterday and despite all reassurances I’m still questioning rejection of placement on transfer.
I know I’m being ridiculous. I downed a bottle of wine in the evening and feel awful this morning.
My DC was refused reception placement at his current school and I found out yesterday that this was because his EHCP stated use of PECS book and this was too specialist for mainstream.
They then took DC because the LA gave school more funding and named them.
There then followed a really awkward exchange between me/caseworker/SENCO. I asked if the funding could realistically cover his needs (his amended EHCP was 8 months late with provision map which school use circulated 9 months late) I said I’d seen the figure £14000 and did that equate to £8000 from LA and £6000 that the school need to find? The caseworker wanted to know where I’d got £14000 figure from, SENCO looked extremely flustered and said I was wrong until I showed where I’d seen the figure.
Then backtracked and said - oh yes : that’s £10000 from the LA and £4000 covered by school.
The caseworker then said how finances are between the school and the LA and it’s not really for parental discussion.
Another exchange involved saying that rejection of placement is usually due to violence or disruptive behaviour (which DC doesn’t exhibit) so again I should feel reassured. I then pointed out that initial refusal of placement due to PECS and that wasn’t behaviour related.
I felt completely and utterly drained after the meeting - one comment sticking in my head was the SENCO stating that she is the most hated person in our county. I pointed out that where I challenge anything, it’s not personal - it’s a difficult system to navigate and I apologised if I’d come across that way. I truly believe I have not made any personal attacks and tried to uphold my knowledge of the law.
I know rejection shouldn’t happen and would be unlawful, but I still think it could. And it’s the whole feeling again of my child/me being difficult and unwanted and trying to uphold the law resulting in an upset SENCO trying to do an extremely difficult job.

@BangerMasher it is really difficult. The big "elephant in the room" so to speak is that SEN money is almost never spent up to the numbers you see on the paperwork. A lot just vanishes into general funds because schools are so underfunded for everything (and also, some of what helps you as a SEN parent doesn't directly cost e.g. people who are nice to your child, professionals who are, well, professional...).

I was in the daft position this time last year where my child had a place at the school because I teach there (no requirement anyone to know anything about her needs), and then it was named in her EHCP at which point I was desperately trying to talk down her needs so I didn't scare the Head. Her needs that I had to describe as compellingly as possible to get through the tribunals.

You can't win; may as well please yourself.

If you are the poster who has posted about this before, DS wasn’t refused a place in reception. The school raised concerns when consulted. A normal part of the process. The LA, rightly, still named them anyway because the threshold for one of the lawful exceptions wasn’t met. Objections during consultations are far more nuanced than the school rejecting the individual child and not wanting them or their parents. It wasn’t/isn’t personal. It is a normal aspect of the process and is part of why SARs can be hard reading. It isn’t unlawful for the school to raise objections when consulted. In your case, the school was right to raise objections. They were right to go back to the LA regarding funding. They didn’t have the staff or the staff training to enable them to meet DS’s needs and the EHCP wording wasn’t good enough.

You should focus on the provision detailed, specified and quantified in F. If it is detailed, specified and quantified in F, it must be provided and can be enforced. Ultimately, the LA would be responsible for ensuring it is provided. That includes ensuring there was sufficient funding. Whilst £10k is more than LAs sometimes provide, because LAs rarely provide sufficient funding unless forced, it is unlikely to be sufficient if the EHCP is watertight. If F isn’t detailed, specified and quantified, the support doesn’t have to be provided, can’t be enforced, and there could be £40k attached to the EHCP but still not having to provide what DS requires.

Your problem with the late amended EHCP following the last AR meeting isn’t the school’s responsibility. It is the LA who are responsible for complying with the timescales for sending the amendment notice and then finalising on time. Yes, the LA does a good job of making you think it is because of the school when actually it is the LA’s failing.

https://www.ipsea.org.uk/blog/when-a-school-doesnt-want-your-child

“What do you do when a school doesn’t want your child? When the school you want to name in your child’s EHC plan not only says they can’t meet the child’s needs but seems dismissive of the very idea, and of your child themselves?”

I’ve found this blog useful, and thanks for your explanation.
I definitely felt a strong sense of dismissiveness, and I think it’s this that I struggle with rather than my misunderstanding of how things work.