EHCP support thread no. 6

[Needlenardlenoo]

This thread is to support everyone engaged in the EHCP process. The purpose is two fold: so that you don't feel alone if you're involved with it, and so you can easily find posters who are experienced with the various difficulties to help point you in the right direction, whether that be by giving general advice, telling you specifically what action should, or could, be taken in a particular situation, or countering common myths you will hear, such as:

"Your child is not X enough to get an EHCP"
"The school has to do/pay Y first"
"EHCPs are only for Z situation"
"The local authority do X/say Y/won't do Z" (the SEN Code 2014 applies to the whole of England: it doesn't vary by local authority). [Wales and Scotland have different regimes].

It is particularly important at the moment to understand clearly what your child's rights actually are in law (not what the school or LA or Sendias say they are), when the government are actively trying to remove EHCPs and are leaking stories regularly to the media, with the intention, I suspect, of deflecting attention from their own shortcomings onto parents who are already in a difficult situation. If in doubt, the charity IPSEA has neutral and factual information:
https://www.ipsea.org.uk/

Here are links to previous threads:

Original 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
EHCP support thread no. 5 -
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/special_educational_needs/5309128-ehcp-support-thread-no-5?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share [please post on here till it's full]

Our SS will be submitting their AR paperwork to the LA this week and saying they cannot meet DS(15yrs)'s needs. Their report and our private EP's report will recommend EOTAS.

I'm putting together a proposal that will cover flexible online learning and therapeutic provision as recommended by the EP. She also included an EOTAS coordinator in her report.

How much would be reasonable to budget for an EOTAS coordinator over a school year?

I've seen some suggestions of 5 hours per week and rates as high as £100/hr, which for a full school year would be over £11k and probably well beyond what we would need. Would a fixed number of hours per term be a better approach?

I imagine we'll need most of the support at the start and at review points, although DS has been out of school for 18 months and needs a gentle return and the ability to move between providers if one isn't working, so there might be a bit of movement as we try different options.

The EP also recommended we manage the package through a PB to ensure we have the flexibility DS needs. This isn't in her report but I'm guessing it's a negotiation to be had with the LA rather than something within the EP's remit.

The number of co-ordinator hours varies massively. Some have none, which shouldn’t happen but does all too often. Some have 1hr per half-term which is nowhere enough for any package IMO, right up to 7+hrs pw year round. Some have TTO, some 42, 45 or 48 weeks pa, and some for 52 weeks. How many hours you need depends on the co-ordinator’s role (not all co-ordinator roles are the same), the package, and the child’s needs.

The problem with termly hours is how it is worded. Otherwise you may find the LA provides all the hours in the first week or last week of the term and none for the rest of the term.

The cost depends on the role and the type of person who is to fulfil it which will depend on the wording in F. I have seen anything from NMW for more of an admin position undertaken by an admin assistant or LSA/TA to £150p/h for a qualified professional e.g. specialist teacher or EP. I have also seen LA’s claim one of their caseworkers can do the job. Worded correctly, they absolutely cannot.

You also need to think about whether it needs to be in-person or if remote will work.

We have a specialist teacher who undertakes the role for DS1&3. DS1 has 6hrs pw for 52 weeks. DS3 has 4hrs pw for 52 weeks. Neither are enough. We have live appeals for them at the moment, part of which includes further co-ordinator hours. Termly MDTs (e.g. arranging the meetings, summary report writing beforehand, prep for meetings, attendance at and chairing of the meeting, admin afterwards.), AR (e.g. admin and prep beforehand, arranging AR meeting, updated advice and information, attendance at and chairing of the meeting, report writing and admin afterwards.) and training are accounted for separately. There is also a separate pot of hours any professionals can use for advice from other professionals within the team. Sometimes the co-ordinator is involved in these hours.

You can request a PB and the LA must identify a PB unless the funding cannot be disaggregated because it would negatively affect LA services or it is an inefficient use of resources. PBs can be paid in different ways. Direct payments whereby you are given monies to organise provision yourself. LA or school controlled funds where they commission support directly. Third party arrangements where a third party is given the funds to manage on your behalf. A mixture of 2 or 3 of the above. You can request DPs and the LA should comply unless they believe you aren’t capable of managing the monies, you would use the funds inappropriately, it would negatively affect other LA services or it is an inefficient use of resources. A PB doesn’t automatically mean more flexibility. It will depend on what is agreed and the wording in F (and the DPA if you have DPs).

@KeepItSpinning Thanks for info re EOTAS coordinators. Remote would be fine (DS does not want in-person interactions ATM, and DH and I are fine working with someone on a remote basis).

If our SS is saying they can't meet needs and that they think no school would be appropriate for DS, and we have an EP report recommending EOTAS, do we also need to write to the LA ourselves to formally request EOTAS?

@SpaceInvader321 as part of the AR process, you should still present your/DS’s views. You can do this before, during and after the AR meeting. Reference your evidence when you do this.

Following the AR meeting, if the LA proposes to amend, you will be sent the Notice of Amendment (Amendment Notice/draft/whatever you want to call it). You can reply to this to comment on the proposed amendments. Since the content of the EOTAS/EOTIS package should be in F, this will include commenting on the content of the EOTAS/EOTIS package you are proposing. At this point, you would normally state your preferred placement but you can state you are seeking EOTAS provision under section 61 of the Children and Families Act 2014 because it is inappropriate for provision to be made in a school or college therefore section I should be left blank. Make sure your response covers why it is inappropriate. Again, referencing the evidence.

Is the SS formally giving notice?

@KeepItSpinning Yes, the SS is submitting their report from the AR meeting this week and they will say they can't meet needs.

In the AR meeting, they seemed in agreement that a physical school is inappropriate for DS at this time.

Our EP also attended the AR meeting and has written a report with recommendations for EOTAS and a very flexible approach (with the ability for DS to move between providers, set the pace himself, choose GCSE subjects, etc).

We also have a psychiatry report from last year detailing some of the weekly therapeutic support DS requires -- though I'm not sure it's specific enough (eg, "Weekly individual therapy (psychological or creative) with measurable outcomes").

I know the LA will have two weeks to notify us of their decision. I'd like them to know what our preferred provision is before they redraft the EHCP (if they agree to amend).

I've drafted a proposal of provision and costings, so was wondering if we should write to the LA after the SS submits their paperwork, to make our argument for EOTAS and also to submit our proposal for the provision we think would be appropriate.

@SpaceInvader321 the LA has 4 weeks from the AR meeting to inform you if they are proposing to amend and, if they are, send the amendment notice.

If you haven’t already shared your views, do that now.

When you say you have a proposal of provision and costing, it can help to make it into a table. Remember the golden thread that runs through EHCPs. Needs from B and what needs need to be included in B even if they aren’t there now (it can help to break it down into the different areas of needs), provision from F or what provision needs to be included F even if it isn’t there now (and any provision that is not in F but is essential for the delivery of the provision in F), provider, cost (one-off/weekly/monthly/termly/yearly), outcome or outcome that isn’t in E but needs to be. If you will be requesting a PB, you can also add a column for how each part of the PB will be paid (DPs, third party arrangements, commissioned directly). Don’t worry if you aren’t sure about all the details yet. It can help to add references to the evidence, particularly for the bits that aren’t in B/E/F but need to be.

It can also help to make a mock timetable if you haven’t already. It doesn’t have to be 100% accurate. It doesn’t even have to be what will ultimately happen. If provision needs to be child-led/self-directed/flexible, that can still be accommodated in a timetable. If provision needs to be built up, you can still make a timetable. This enables you to show it is a considered, organised, reasonable and, importantly, viable plan. You can add references to the EHCP and evidence to support each provision on the timetable.

This helps so everyone can see the needs, what the provision will look like, how the provision will meet those needs, that there is some kind of future plan going forward beyond the past (too many people get bogged down in focusing on the past or in only showing it is inappropriate for provision to be made in a school/college). Similar to how a school has an aims and ethos (and sometimes vision) statement, prospectus and SEN information report.

You aren’t responsible for organising provision and you can’t be forced to do the above, but many parents find it helpful. Many have to appeal to secure a proper EOTAS/EOTIS package and the above can be helpful for an appeal, too.

The school saying they can’t meet needs isn’t quite the same as them saying they are giving notice. Sometimes some will say the former but still be happy to continue to be named. They shouldn’t and it is terrible behaviour placing money ahead of children and young people, but it happens. You should ask if they are formally giving notice.

Please help with what next steps we can take. Child was granted eotis in December, after a year of consultation, where no school was found, and 7 months of the council not finding anyone suitable for section 19 provision. Despite agreeing eotis, we still don't have any provision 6 months later! It took a while to get the necessary ehcp wording changed and they messed up tribunal submissions 2 times.

They are now completely ignoring emails asking when we will get a package and the complaint we raised is also going unanswered. I presume that ombudsman would be the next stage, but doubt we can do that without a complaint response. Is there anything else we can do? Have already sought help from our MP, but they seem disinterested.

@ThaneOfGlamis do you have the provision in the EHCP? I’m not clear from your post whether you had agreement to leave section I blank for EOTIS in December but have had to appeal the content or if the appeal concluded in December?

The content of the EOTIS package should be set out in F of the EHCP. If it is but isn’t being provided and chasing hasn’t worked, you need a pre-action letter. Then, if that doesn’t work, JR proceedings will. However, this is only possible if the provision is detailed, specified and quantified in F. If it isn’t, that needs resolving.

Complaining and then going to the LGO isn’t a suitable remedy because it takes too long. Although so you are aware in case you wanted to go down that route, if the LA fails to respond to your complaint, you can still go to the LGO.

and 7 months of the council not finding anyone suitable for section 19 provision

The LA was fobbing you off with this. Section 19 provision can be enforced in the same way as provision in the EHCP can be.

@KeepItSpinning section F is currently blank. Does that mean we can't do a pre action letter? Could we go down that route for section 19, in the absence of eotis, instead?

No educator has been named and we have not been able to discuss whether they will fund a person budget, or name their own providers. We have sourced suitable providers, so would prefer a personal budget. They couldn't even find someone for section 19, so no trust that they could run the whole thing.

We complained just over a month ago. It was acknowledged as received, but no response since.

@ThaneOfGlamis if section F is currently blank, you presumably still have a live appeal and the appeal has not been concluded?

So the LA has agreed to leave section I blank for EOTIS as per section 61 of the Children and Families Act 2014. But they have not agreed to the content of the EOTIS package and there is still an outstanding dispute over B&F?

You need to focus on the appeal. That is the route to ensuring the EHCP is good. This will mean the EOTIS package is good. Then you can enforce it if it isn’t provided.

When is your hearing? If it isn’t imminent, have you requested an expedited hearing?

At the moment, if F is blank, you can’t enforce provision under section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

Providers cannot be named in section F. They can be included in section J.

The LGO won’t deal with anything related to the Tribunal. Even if they would, the LGO does not consider a month as a reasonable time frame for waiting for a reply.

In the meantime, if the LA is refusing to provide provision under section 19 of the Education Act 1996, you could look at a pre-action letter for that. While the LA’s s19 duty is separate to the LA’s duty under section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to provide the provision in the EHCP, it really depends on when your hearing is as to whether or not it is worth a pre-action letter for s19 provision.

They couldn't even find someone for section 19

This really was fobbing you off rather than them genuinely being unable to provide s19 provision.

Ok, I am being confusing. Mainly as I find it all confusing! Section F names eotis, the blank section is "who will provide this". It also says that provision should start in the home to build trust with a key adult, with a hope that this leads to more structured environment in future.

Section I is blank and there is no section J.

The hearing was to be in June and was for the wording on the ehcp (the original was garbage) and for eotis provision. They agreed to suitable changes and eotis, so we agreed the matter was concluded.

I agree they are fobbing us off at every turn, but the process is so alien to us that we don't necessarily know what is wrong, when and what to do about it. With our less complex to educate child, the ehcp was issued and our preference was the closest suitable state special school, which was easily agreed.

So in December the appeal concluded by consent and the has LA issued the finalised amended EHCP following that?

Section F should set out the EOTIS package. It isn’t enough for it to just say EOTIS will be provided. The actual content of the package needs to be included in F. Is it? The answer to that is really important to know what you do next.

F needs to be detailed, specified and quantified. That includes stating who will provide it. For example, ‘key adult’ is too vague. Other than the issue with who will provide it, is the rest detailed, specified and quantified? This is also a really important to know.

There should be a section J. All EHCPs must have sections A-K. Section J might not have a personal budget set out in it, but the section should still be there.

Hi all, so I have just been copied into an email from the LA Tribunal Officer to SENDIST with a SEND7 and "supplementary evidence". (Our final evidence deadline was last Friday).

This evidence includes attendance history from start of this academic year (with all my emails and notes of arrival times), and a copy of DD's internal provision plan.

It also includes the SENCO's statement, the private EP report and OT report (all of which I have already sent to SENDIST!).

There are barely any details on the SEND7, they said they asked me for my views today (they haven't and obviously haven't waited five working days for a response), and bizarrely they've ticked the box that says it's a parental request?!

What on earth are they playing at and what do I do? Do I point this all out in a response to both them and SENDIST?

The deadline for both case review forms AND the tribunal bundle is this Friday. I have already sent in my case review form.

If I put something like:

"Please can I clarify that this is not a parental request for supplementary evidence, my views have not been sought as to the admission of late evidence and I have already submitted the majority of this evidence prior to the final evidence deadline. In addition, the deadline for case review forms and the tribunal bundle is this Friday."

Or do I just go back to the LA with this?

I would just point out you have not made the request, the LA has not sought your views and which evidence has already been submitted, but that you do not object to the inclusion of other evidence the LA has now submitted.

I've just sent:

Dear all,

Please may I clarify that this is not a parental request (as ticked on the SEND7) as I previously submitted the majority of this evidence before the extended final evidence deadline (midday on 22 May). My views have not been sought.

Furthermore, I believe the deadline for case review forms and the evidence bundle remains this Friday (5 June) at midday.

Kind regards,

It just feels like a time-wasting exercise? The SENCO statement and the private reports are very strong in my favour. The attendance data shows an improvement on this year (but which I have not denied) and the provision plan shows some things in place, but the SENCO has asked to meet to go through what else they can do as a result of the EP report.

If the LA don't send the tribunal bundle on Friday, can I submit a SEND7 asking for them to be barred?! (I know though that @KeepItSpinning you've said that they can be easily reinstated - the whole process is just a mockery and shambles!!). (I know we all know that!)

Sorry cross-posted @KeepItSpinning, do you think what I replied with was okay or that I should send another email saying I do not object?

I would leave it now you have sent it.

The CRF and bundle deadline wasn’t mentioned by the LA in the part you posted, was there more?

If the LA doesn’t send the bundle, you wouldn’t jump straight to requesting they are barred. That is not going to happen for ‘just’ missing the first deadline.

Thank you @KeepItSpinning

No, the LA didn't mention the deadline for that, was just reminding them as how can they submit an evidence bundle when three days before the deadline they ask for other minor evidence to be included?

It's just really confused me - I am trying to work out if this is some carefully thought out ploy (to do what, I'm not sure.. time-wasting?) or if the Tribunal Officer is just really incompetent (why would she date the form for seeking my views on the same day as having sent it? And why would she say it was a parental request?)

I get that, though why does it clearly state that:

If the LA does not comply with the direction and fails without reasonable
explanation to deliver the tribunal hearing bundles as required by the
05/06/2026 then the further participation of the LA in the appeal shall be
automatically BARRED pursuant to Rule 8((2) of the Tribunal Procedure
Rules 2008 because they have failed to comply with a direction that stated
that failure to comply would lead to their further participation in the appeal
being barred.

I guess their definition of 'reasonable' is quite loose?!

The only minor concern I have is that the OT report mentions 1-1.5 hours of school missed a day (when I spoke to her in Autumn, DD was going in around 9.30-10am most days). (I didn't say how much school DD was missing, just told her what times she usually went in).

However her most recent attendance shows arrival times of 9.00-9.30am (which is in the EP report done more recently).

It's not particularly significant but could they query this? (Even though it was accurate at the time).

They can still submit the bundle. Asking for late evidence to be admitted doesn’t change that.

It is just the court’s wording. The LA will be given chance to comply. SENDIST likes to have all the information possible. But you don’t know they will miss the deadline, don’t borrow worries from tomorrow!

Thank you @KeepItSpinning, I really appreciate all of your support and calming words!

I don't think I'm even really worried about them missing the deadline and the hearing isn't until December. It just threw me and I just want a resolution now (was half-hoping, though not expecting! that they might concede). Plus all the worry regarding what to do about secondary school.

Afternoon all, We have just had the amended draft following tribunal and annual review. All good, but the health section is very out of date now, with more diagnoses. Neither the school in the annual review paperwork, nor the LA have changed any of this despite them both being aware and it having been discussed both at tribunal and at annual review.

Given she is yr12 and it really won't make a difference, it is normal for this not to change or should I ask for amendments so it is as accurate as possible - looking ahead to using is as evidence for DSA provision!

The LA should issue as per the Tribunal Order. Some LAs sometimes issue a draft first, but it is not like going through the normal draft process because the LA must follow the Tribunal Order.

Did you appeal C&G?

At ARs, it isn’t unusual for LAs not to update EHCPs even if amendments are required.

ARs shortly after Tribunals shouldn’t amend the provision Ordered by SENDIST just because the LA disagrees with it. If there is significant new evidence, you can put forward amendments.

DSA is a far easier and less adversarial system. You probably have more than enough even if the EHCP is poor.

@KeepItSpinning the LA amended after tribunal and issued just in time for the annual review. They then agreed to amend again (!) so have now issued an updated draft. This includes all the tribunal ordered changes plus the additional changes needed after annual review. Minus any changes to the health needs. Given there is no health provision in the EHCP it doesn't make any difference if it is inaccurate or not, just mildly irritating to have a document that is incorrect!

I have many other battles to fight so think I will park this - pick your battles is so relevant when dealing with SEN issues 🙂