Draft EHCP arrived, but summer holidays?

[Will36]

Hi,

We finally got our son's draft EHCP yesterday, which gives us 2 weeks to respond and speak to the schools. All the medical evidence says specialist provision is required.

We are also waiting on organisations to respond to see if they have capacity to review the draft plan for us suitability and if the wording is legally enforcible in section F.

The issue is, we have contacted all the schools, and they are closed until 4th September, further to this, we are away from 29th August until 11th September (booked 12 months ago).

The final EHCP was due on 4th May, so long overdue.

Where does this leave us in terms of been able to view the schools or are we expected to pick a setting without seeing one?

You can request longer to respond to the draft.

Have you already thought about schools before this point?

Many schools will respond to parental emails over the holidays. Many will also have some staff in at points between now and the start of term.

We contacted the schools even as far back as November 2024, and again in March and July 2025. The answer was the same, without a draft EHCP they won't go further, we couldn't even view the schools or have any discussions.

The schools have auto responded to emails saying they are closed and won't respond until 3rd September. They just mention for urgent safety guarding issues to contact the council, so it sounds like they have no staff at all.

I'll go back to the council and see if we can fix a date for late September for the draft response. Because we won't be able to start the true 2 week consultation until 10th September when we return to England.

It isn’t uncommon to not be able to view schools and have detailed discussions, especially SS, without a draft. But you can still ask around locally, attend any public events, discuss with professionals, etc. before you receive the draft.

The LA is unlikely to agree a date a month away for your response to the draft. It is a minimum of 15 days, but they are unlikely to agree double that. You should comment on the amendments now, reflect on the schools you prefer, communicate with schools via email &/or phone while you are away, and if the LA agree to allow you longer to state your preferred placement, visit a short list ASAP once you are back.

It's so unfair, we have been battling the LA about it since January, and were at the point of PAP letter to make progress, and now they drop the draft in the middle when all the schools are closed and they know we are out the country. If they had delivered it in April when they were supposed to, it wouldn't have been an issue. It's strange the LA can delay without impuity but you have a fixed window you cannot miss, a window that they can decide on.

We had been asking the schools in advance, but without a draft they refused to speak with us. Apparently one of the schools had spoken to parents who didnt yet have a draft, and the LA had words with them about it, since then you no longer can make any progress with them.

The professionals we have spoken to have all stated, specialist provision is required, not just for education but for safety. These include the LA own autism inclusion team.

We'll probably just have to name a SS school, even without viewing them, which seems mental.

As I said, it isn’t uncommon for schools not to discuss things with parents until they have a draft, but that doesn’t stop you asking around locally. A lot of knowledge and insight can be gathered from local parents and local professionals without hearing a word from the school itself.

Contact them ASAP today. If any of them offer GCSE there are likely to be senior staff in today dealing with admissions, remarks etc. Worth a try.

One of them responded this afternoon to say they are checking their referrals but it would take 2-3 days to see if they have his file.

As an update. We have been given an extension until next week from the LA. However none of the schools have received a consultation that the LA said they sent them to, so they are resending them all.

LAs do stupid things like send consultations to the info@ address in late August or early Sept when the office is overwhelmed. Or they are lying.

So far none of the 4 consulted schools have received it. One of them has contacted the case worker directly to get a copy personally sent to them.

It is possible the LA isn’t being truthful and has not sent consultations despite saying they have, but it is also possible they have and the schools have missed it or the schools are not being honest.

Missing it is more likely than been dishonest. One of them that said they haven't got it, is the SENCO who we have made multiple meetings with and they were telling me they still haven't got it and asked me to chase up. However, It's just odd that no school seems to have received the consultation, it makes me think something happened within the team that's ment to send the consultations out and they all got missed.

Missing it is more likely than been dishonest.

This isn’t necessarily the case at all. It is not uncommon for schools to be dishonest. Just like it is not uncommon for LAs to lie. It is why SARs can be illuminating yet difficult reading.

It's perfectly possible they "missed it" aka LA couldn't be arsed to look up the emails of the actual SENCOs (generally pretty easy to find out for a secondary) AND lied about it.

The main message I took from two years of dealing with this rubbish is that administratively I, an unpaid mum, care much more and am way more competent than any of these people!

Just an update. I've spoken to all the schools and LA. Issue in the department meant it wasn't sent. All schools confirmed receipt of it now on the same day and all have been given another 2 weeks to respond. So our date of the start of September has slipped to the end of September.

The draft plan we have has been split into 4 areas of SEN, rather than just a single section B, E and F. They put down SEMH as "no needs" and put the SEMH into the C&I area of SEN, despite those explicitly mentioning anxiety, social issues etc in the medical reports from their own EP. So it's in the EHCP just the wrong area of SEN but the LA won't move it or provide a reason for their decision. They have however added more to section B, E and F based on our comments to date.

So far 1 school has replied to say cannot meet need, but after digging, they admit they can meet need but they are full, since he has a requirement for small classrooms and those groups of children are already at capacity, on order to maintain the small size.

Another school is taking us to formal assessment to see if they can meet need.

Other schools haven't yet responded to the LA yet.

It is normal for some LAs to lay out their EHCPs by having subsections for different areas of needs.

For some, social issues are C&I needs. For example, many social communication and social interaction difficulties arising for ASD are C&I needs.

Unless the school saying ‘full’ is wholly independent, that isn’t enough of a reason for the LA not to name it if it is your preference. For non-wholly independent schools, you don’t need an offer of a place. Being full is not defined in law, and for non-wholly independent schools, on its own being ‘full’ is not enough of a reason to refuse to name your preference. The LA has to prove the school is so full admitting DS is incompatible with the efficient education of others or use of resources. The bar for this is higher than many LAs and some schools admit. There is a point where they can prove this but it has to be something tangible and specific and is more than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”.

I hope ‘small’ is defined. Otherwise it is too vague and woolly.

The near by specialist schools are independent. Not sure if they are "wholly" independent , but the Ofsted reports do list them all as independent.

Small is defined, as up-to 6 children. We are happy to be flexible, as we are sure in the right setting he would thrive.

I do understand the social side can be caused by communication. We have been focusing on communication as much as possible. During periods of change he had become mute and we do think of we didn't try so hard the last 2 years he might have become non verbal. He is no doubt behind, but is starting to improve with all the supports in place.

Not all independent schools are wholly independent. Some are section 41 independents and the rules for naming them are the same as the rules for academies, free schools, NMSS, etc. You need to check which they are.

One of the specialist schools is independent, the other is independent but is listed as S41 independent school as per this sheet - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-special-schools-and-colleges

Hi,

Bit further along.

Recap, plan was issued in md August when schools were closed, so extended to mid sept, but no schools got a copy of the EHCP, so it was re-issued and they were given to late sept to reply. Its been back to panel since, with the schools initial responses. 2 cannot meet need, 1x S41 school needs a formal assessment, 1x maintained specialist school needs to check for capacity (not a legal reason to deny on its own).

The EHCP draft is good, needs/provision/outcome match up, and its specified and quantified, but there is no Section I school named despite us putting in a preference when originally asked for a preferred school.

The LA have taken the plan to panel, and just re-issued a new draft without Section I, as they are awaiting for all schools to respond in full. Some schools are doing formal assessments, and these take a few weeks to arrange.

Are we forced to wait for schools responses, or can we ask they finalise the plan whilst these consultations are continuing?

The reason I ask is we have been told the school has spaces which is a good start, but they have 6x more applications than spaces available, so delays could cause the next issue, which is a fight for a place at a full school.

Drafts must always have section I blank. They should never have a placement or type of placement named.

You should push the LA to finalise and appeal if necessary.

The LA can name s41 schools and maintained SS even if the schools object when consulted, and just because a non-wholly independent school says they can’t meet needs doesn’t mean the legal threshold is met.

If your preference is not wholly independent, the LA must name your preferred placement unless the LA can prove:

• The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs 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 prove one of the above is high. Being full is not defined in law, and for non-wholly independent schools, on its own being ‘full’ is not enough of a reason to refuse to name your preference. The LA has to prove the school is so full admitting DS is incompatible. 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”. For non-wholly independent schools, the LA can, and must, name the school regardless of the school’s objections unless they can prove one of the reasons above.

You should recheck section F. It isn’t uncommon for parents not to realise some wording is vague and woolly until they need to enforce the provision and can’t.

Thanks.

That's what I thought, I was expecting a final plan today, but just got another Draft. I spoke to the LA about it and they said they were just waiting, and i pointed out the 15 days for consultations have been substantially exceeded. But didn't get any more than, we are waiting for confirmation of availability.

Our only concern about the maintained specialist school, is they won't let you view, until you accept them to be named as your school, and even then they only allow you to view on 1 specific day per year.

We had the EHCP checked over by a service already, and all the required amends were made.

I'll go back to the LA, and be specific, to tell them to finalise it, then we'll go to tribunal if they name an unsuitable placement.