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

Thank you so much @thatsnotmygarden
I’m going to keep referring back to that and the wording ‘the bar is high’. In fact, the draft amended KST26 came through late this afternoon. I will look through it all tomorrow.

And then a letter for me to put my choice of school, which can be amended in Sept? 25 if needed. Wondering if the month is wrong…
The feeder school wouldn’t allow a tour when I asked last term - until mid Sept 25, so I haven’t looked at choices yet - other than online.
I don’t know how much ambiguity there is in that wording - “the setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs of the child or young person”.
I feel that schools may (in their best interest) push for ‘unsuitable’ LA’s will push for their cheapest option/best interest (mainstream but then ‘up’ the funding when school refuses at consultation) - and then what if the school still refuses? There is a right to mainstream - but not a specific placement. Therefore if one school says - no, we want more funding, but another school choice accepts - the LA will go with the cheapest option? A member of school SLT stated that : ‘I should be grateful that the school took my child on’ - so why do schools have the impression that they control this decision if it’s ultimately in the hands of the LA?

When responding to the draft, you can state your preferred placement.

Because DS will be in Y2 in an infant school, he will be in a phase transfer year. What should happen is a phase transfer review should be held in the autumn term. Following this, you should be sent the amendment notice and, as part of your response, given the chance to state your preferred placement for Y3. And the LA must finalise by 15th Feb at the latest.

Some LAs give parents a deadline for stating their preferred school that falls before they get the amendment notice &/or inform parents they need to complete a specific form &/or tell parents they must name more than one school. You don’t have to. If you do state a school before you get the amendment notice, you can change your mind.

Some LAs use the Y1 AR, especially if in the summer term, as the phase transfer review, but they shouldn’t.

Unless one of the lawful reasons can be proven by the LA, the school objecting doesn’t prevent it being named. What you have posted on MN wouldn’t make the school unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs. I wouldn’t worry about that. Funding negotiations can be part of objections to consultations. Sometimes it leads to LAs naming another placement, sometimes it doesn’t.

A range of reasons lead to schools saying things that aren’t true about admissions. Sometimes schools say things to put parents off. Some schools don’t understand the law (just look at normal admissions and those schools leading parents to believe it isn’t an equal preference system). LAs like to maintain their relationships with schools, so will sometimes name school B even if they can’t prove one of the lawful exceptions for school A.

Hello everyone . New to the thread and wanted to introduce myself. This is a long one....

Im Laura, I have 4 children. DD 23 and 3 DS of 20,15 and 5 (on Sunday ) .My 20yr old son has had an ehcp since he was 13yrs old and currently is at specialist college about to go into his 4th year and hes doing so well. the change is incredible.

My youngest received his EHCP back in March . I had already told the case coordinator that I was going to appeal as she said and i quote , " The L.A do not support nor recommend a specialist setting " . For context , my little man is non verbal, has been awaiting an Autism assesment since Oct 2023 and whilst his current mainstream do their absolute best for him, its not enough. He did the whole of Reception on a Part Time Timetable.

I got the mediation certificate in April and immediately registered an appeal with the aim to change Section i . I received the email detailing the timeline and deadlines through the process with a final appeal hearing for the end of April 2026. The special school came and observed my son in his setting . All went well so I heard.

First response deadline was the 25th July 12pm. At 10am I received an email. I opened up my inbox so be presented with the subject header in caps saying CONCEDED IN FULL! I went to pieces. I couldnt stop crying. The head of the special school had made their offer of a place for my boy on the 30th June stating he can start from 3/11/25 ! The wording was " Following receipt of a positive response from school , the LA have reviewed 's case and ackowledges that a specialist setting would be most approoriate to suit *'s needs . The LA therefore confirm that they concede the appeal in full " .

Fast forward to the 6th Aug and the tribunal sent their final order to the LA for them to start the process of issuing the amended ehcp. 1hr later I received it on the hub. Its all official, my little man is going to his new school in November . I cant wait to see him thrive and not just survive. Then to top it off , I got an email from the SEN home to school transport department approving his transport right up until the end of the academic year in 2036. For the next 3yrs he will also have a P.A to accompany him.

I wanted to share this here to show we CAN win, we ALWAYS push push push no matter how hard it gets. I hope this gives everyone hope . Be the thorn in the LAs side, keep fighting and win :)

We have just had similar experience where it became clear the school would manage out through suspensions etc. Key is understanding why the schools are saying they can’t take. LA policy was consult 3 closest schools -all I knew were unsuitable.
So I took control and requested another one be consulted otherwise the LA could have named any ‘suitable school’. I made it clear this was my new parental preference. The 4th school stated too many EHCP’s already placed there and this would cause incompatibility -this argument was not lawful (I had already stated to LA I can’t see any case law where this appears to be a lawful reason so they knew I would challenge them) so LA directed them to take- the school could object to Secretary of State but are not- it’s a crap position to be in but you can control it to a certain extent. Speak to schools you don’t want, tell them why you think it’s not going to work if you don’t think it is - I found no school had an issue with writing a negative consult if you think it isn’t going to work. If all are negative LA have to consider if any objection at your parental preference is lawful before they cannot name. They still have to consider this if your parental preference is negative but another is a positive consult but in my view they try to take the easiest route possible to placing a child to get them off their list of cases and not what is in the child’s best interests.

That's a great story @Muvva1981 and I'm only sorry you've been dealing with the EHCP system for so long.

Regarding school choice, when I realised the LA wasn't going to give any help at all with choosing a suitable secondary, I picked one myself and wrote all the refuse to issue tribunal documentation with that one in mind.

Once I won that tribunal everything suddenly fell into place.

So I agree the LA takes the path of least resistance sometimes.

It's such a big ask of parents though. And once you look into it, in some areas (not all) there are so many schools you could potentially travel to. We could travel into several adjacent London Boroughs plus Kent. I really do not think our LA knows much at all about schools outside the Borough or even the numerous private schools inside the Borough!

@thatsnotmygarden
Thank you - and that’s prompted me to look at the IPSEA advice. Yes his annual review was right at the end of the summer term - and other than thinking - I’d this too soon? - will it be an accurate reflection? I didn’t realise it should have been Yr 2 autumn term. However - given that there was an 8 month delay on last review, I’m hoping this gives time.

I can’t think that my choice of school will be anything other than the feeder school. It’s a large school with another KS1 school feeding in too. But parents seem to think it’s more inclusive, year groups are set out almost as separate school in themselves and well funded.
So I’ve been asked to state preference now, and I can amend preference in Sept?? which means I don’t have much chance to tour schools. I’m going to ask for clarification here.

Sincere thanks again - your advice on this thread is invaluable. I feel so much more empowered which directly impacts DS. Plus I can pass on the advice to other parents.

@Muvva1981 That’s fantastic and lovely to read.

@rareazurebee Thank you - that’s good to know. I will need to meet the SENCO of my proposed preference, and I’m not sure how much to say when we meet - or to be fairly stoic and basically see if the school is a good fit. I’m thinking the process is - LA consults parental preference plus 2 other local schools, there might be a strong chance that they all refuse, LA is likely to push for parental preference as it’s the closest feeder school plus cheapest option for them - and then if the school continues to push against the school has that option to object to Sec of State, but probably won’t - if both me/LA agree (best interests plus lowest funding option for LA). Well done for taking control - and so much of this seems to rely on a parent knowing the law and forcing it to be upheld. Wrong, because the complexity seems to allow a lot of disingenuity and tactics. That’s not inclusivity - and it’s not how I remember inclusivity working when I worked in schools a decade or so ago. I now help out for voluntary organisation where children learn really happily, and inclusion/funding isn’t this massive issue it’s turned out to be in schools.

@Needlenardlenoo

That’s great to read how you fought and won - this thread is so helpful.
Yes, when it comes to secondary there is a close - but out of borough - school with a COIN unit that may well be a very good fit.

A friend who works in SEND for the LA said she thought I may have difficulty as even tho it’s close, it’s out of borough - and LA prefer not to cross boroughs.

I don't think my borough shares that view. They may be fairly ignorant of other boroughs' schools (which is somewhat understandable in this area as the borough is large and spread out and as we still have the grammar system in part, plus a decent train and bus network, kids sometimes travel really long distances in miles to secondary). Even amongst my teacher colleagues I often find they know nothing about schools outside their immediate area (or if they teach in a grammar, they know nothing about comprehensives and vice versa).

But on the borough's own statistics they "export" 20% of their SEN kids so they must be aware that they are woefully short of capacity.

Financially speaking, I would have thought this kind of attitude might help a borough because they pay out for the EHCPs but the "high needs block" funding has to cover fewer SEN kids within the borough if they've managed to offload them on other places?

It is a nationally funded system too (the regular grant per child comes from DfES) so parents shouldn't be restricted to their own LA.

I know in the regular admissions system they can't discriminate against applicants from outside the LA if they're close enough geographically.

Congratulations @Muvva1981.

@BangerMasher being out of borough doesn’t prevent a placement being named. Or in the case of a COIN unit, the mainstream school named in I and the provision provided by the unit in F. Your LA is still responsible, including financing the SEP, even if DC attend a school out of area. Particularly with SS, some LAs often claim attending their schools is nil cost because they are place funded. Therefore, according to them, any OOA school is more expensive. In reality, that is laughable and doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, especially with the current pressure on places.

LAs don’t have to consult 3 institutions. That is local policy rather than law. Some will consult fewer. Some more.

Sometimes a large number of EHCP/the circumstances surrounding that can enable LAs to prove incompatibility but the bar for this is higher than LAs and many schools admit. It has to be something tangible and specific and is more than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”. Rather than the vague excuses often used.

Once a school is named in section I, even if the school seeks the Secretary of State’s determination, they must still admit in the meantime. In theory, schools could look at JR if they believe they have been named unlawfully. In reality, both of these options are rarely done.

Delightful sentence in DS’s draft saying ‘DS doesn’t like writing and he doesn’t know how to do it’. No context, I asked a friend to read a page today and commented ‘that’s dreadful’.
I know exactly where that sentence came from (it was a TA/child interview) - and I asked DS when I got home and he said the opposite to me - I did tell them this in the meeting!
So without context - that sentence now just appears in the EHCP. ‘DS doesn’t like writing and doesn’t know how to do it’ - no mention that these were a child’s words when he was given (I suspect) a not-particularly-motivating activity at school.
So much of it I want to rewrite using inclusive language/social model of disability - wondered if anyone know any good links or how lawful inclusive language in a EHCP needs to be?

@Needlenardlenoo I wonder if it’s reciprocal tho, so 20% over border, 20% from the border back. I imagine it would be more admin/change in caseworker/cost - so maybe LA deter if it’s not the cheapest/least hassle option.

@BangerMasher I doubt it.

It's an outer London Borough freeriding on the slightly better funded inner Boroughs in my opinion.

I’m so confused! Have I got this wrong? Case worker is telling me transition reviews never happen in the Autumn Term?
Case worker states
“It is not feasible to hold a review for any child going through Key Stage transfer in Autumn term. This will inevitably lead to delays and there is a strict deadline of when the LA has to issue the Final Amended KST25, naming (DS’s) school placement for next key stage, this is 15/02/2026.”
I checked IPSEA from your post @thatsnotmygarden - and it says 12 months, no earlier/no later. So DS had his at 14 months - two months too early?
What am I not getting??

Issue being that the EHCP isn’t an accurate reflection/or taking into account recent enough progress.

@BangerMasher LAs act unlawfully. That might be what your LA wants parents to believe, but it is not correct. Some LAs try to hold phase transfer reviews in Y5, but technically they shouldn’t.

As per reg 18, phase transfer reviews must happen within 12 months of transfer and the phase transfer review meeting must be held in good time to ensure compliance with the 15th Feb (or 31st March for post 16) deadline.

Thank you @thatsnotmygarden

You are an angel x

@thatsnotmygarden

Another point of confusion for me is I’ve been told : to name a school in early Sept, which I can amend later in Sept. However I haven’t looked at schools yet - and may not have all the info I need until after Sept.
I queried this and was told I can STILL name a different school after Sept if needed? Is that right - why are they asking me to name before I’ve looked at schools, only for me to potentially change my mind later on, and will this potentially be problematic?

And then : I think it’s highly likely that I will appeal. Would be order be : 1) pre action letter 2) mediation 3) SEND tribunal.

If I’m contesting the EHCP - how will this affect his phase transfer/new school application/could it cause delays/issues?

Some LAs tell parents in their LA they need to state a preferred school by a date in September. You don’t. You only need to state your preferred placement once you receive the amendment notice following the phase transfer meeting which should happen in the autumn term. Even if you tell the LA by the date in September, you can change your mind when you respond to the amendment notice. LAs like to start the process of consultations.

JR and appeals to SENDIST are separate processes. The route for challenging the content of the EHCP/placement is via SENDIST. (In very rare circumstances, it is occasionally possible to look at JR. Not relevant in your situation.)

Once you have the finalised EHCP, you can appeal if necessary. Unless just appealing section I, which I wouldn’t recommend, you will need a mediation certificate to appeal. You don’t have to actively partake in mediation and I wouldn’t bother. You only have to consider it. You can get the certificate and submit to SENDIST.

Responding to the amendment notice stating amendments are required doesn’t change the deadline for finalising.

You can’t appeal the phase transfer EHCP until you have the finalised version. You should appeal ASAP once you have the right of appeal. If you appeal ASAP after the 15th Feb deadline, the case will be heard prior to the start of the 26/27 academic year. If you don’t appeal until later, you run the risk of it not being heard before September. That is because whilst phase transfer appeals are prioritised, there isn’t enough court time to hear all cases before September.

@thatsnotmygarden

Thank you. I spoke to IPSEA this morning and they said annual review is not the phase transfer review and phase transfer review needs to happen within 12 months of phase transfer. It’s like they have tried to merge the annual (which was in June - so that would be 14 months) with the phase transfer.

Think best thing is that I treat this current review as annual, so surely I should just be naming his current placement if I’m being asked to name a school (because I’m seeing annual as dealing with this school year) - and ask for an Autumn Term date for phase transfer review. Where I think evidence can be gathered again and I can include summer school report and will have looked at schools.

I think. I must admit I think my head is about to explode and I’m still not sure I’ve got this right.

IPSEA are absolutely fantastic.

It’s like they have tried to merge the annual (which was in June - so that would be 14 months) with the phase transfer.

Yes, this is what I meant when I said some LAs use the Y1 AR, especially if in the summer term, as the phase transfer review, but they shouldn’t. Lots of LAs try to get away with it. Same for the Y5 AR.

Other than the additional deadline, the phase transfer review process is the same as the annual review process. The same steps need to be undertaken.

@thatsnotmygarden

Thank you, thank you. You were right and the first to alert me to this. IPSEA say the same, my county advice line says the same. Case worker said she’s not prepared to discuss it anymore in a very terse email today. She doesn’t agree.
I have the opportunity for meeting with case worker, and school - so I’ll opt to do that. She’s also flatly refused an amendment about safety because it’s ’too specific”.
So it’ll be appeal. And then if I appeal in Sept 25 - I should be ok for 26/27.
If things get very delayed - what will his next school do if they can’t view a final EHCP because it is being appealed?

It is irrelevant whether the caseworker agrees or not. She can’t change what is lawful and what isn’t. No matter how much the LA wishes they could!

There will be a final EHCP even if you are appealing. The final EHCP remains the EHCP in force until when and if an amended EHCP is issued following the conclusion of any potential tribunal.

Massive thanks to @thatsnotmygarden

From your advice, I’ve alerted the Local Authority - to the fact that their website ‘Local Offer’ advice stating ‘Summer Term’ for phase transfer review conflicts with the ‘Autumn Term’ advice on the county SENDIAS webpage. It also conflicts with the IPSEA ‘Autumn Term’ advice.

I hope that better/consistent advice will given parents/case workers.

IPSEA said a recent DofE letter? circular? has been sent to LA’s clarifying regulation 18 - significant wording being WITHIN 12 months.

My quandary is that perhaps an under resourced LA needs as much time as possible to process transfer, and does this potential ‘bend of the law’ result in better outcomes for children?

But : advice needs to be consistent.

@BangerMasher hopefully your LA listens.

The recent reminder was the result of a complaint to the LGO. You can read the LGO’s article here. There is a link to their decision on that page too. The case was about a through school (there is also a previous JR about this) but the premise of a phase transfer review being held within 12 months of transfer is the same.

Adhering to the law shouldn’t make a difference. LAs just like the extra time.

In terms of Section I - I’ve been asked to name a preferred school by 4th Sept, and I assume that - as this is being treated as a transfer review - it should be my choice of transfer school. When I get my final back on 19th Sept surely they won’t have consulted so early and won’t name the transfer school.
If they put his current school in I, then they’ve just treated it as an annual?? or are they likely to just put ‘mainstream’?
And then is it worth appealing if they either 1) have treated it as annual (when it should be transition) and name his current school in or 2) only name ‘mainstream’

And the phrase below appears which confuses me :

Please note if your child is moving key stages (from primary to secondary or secondary to post 16) next academic year, you can request an education setting for this year as well as the setting you would like them to attend in September.

The LA’s paragraph means you can name a placement for the rest of Y2 and another one for the start of Y3.

It is unlikely they will name the phase transfer placement in September. They will probably either fail to adhere to the timescales (which isn’t acceptable) or issue with the current placement, then reissue before the phase transfer deadline (which they shouldn’t do without going through the process of the AN etc. again).

You won’t be able to able the phase transfer placement is they haven’t named the junior school placement, but you could appeal content (and extended) if you wanted. They are unlikely to only name mainstream. If they do, you should appeal. And remind them case law dictates when they name mainstream as type, they should normally name a specific placement.