Urgent for my daughter

[Karenola156]

Title: Southwark SEND Tribunal – Independent school conditional offer. Has anyone experienced this?
Hello everyone,
I’m a parent living in the London Borough of Southwark, currently going through a SEND Tribunal appeal regarding my child’s school placement.
My daughter has an EHCP with complex special educational needs. We have approached numerous schools, including mainstream, specialist and independent schools, but many have declined to offer her a place because of the complexity of her needs.
After a very difficult search, we finally found an independent school that assessed her, invited her for visits and a taster day, and confirmed in writing that it considers itself a suitable placement.
However, the school has made its offer conditional upon the local authority funding 30 hours of one-to-one teaching assistant support per week.
The school has provided detailed explanations about the proposed support, staffing arrangements, allocation of hours and costs. Despite this, Southwark has refused to confirm the funding and maintains that the school is unsuitable.
The school is not a Section 41-approved independent school, and the Tribunal judge has directed me to provide an unconditional offer or identify an alternative school by an approaching deadline.
My daughter has already been without a suitable school placement for a prolonged period, and I am desperate to secure an appropriate education for her.
Has anyone experienced a similar situation where:

• An independent school offered a place conditional on TA funding?
• The local authority refused to fund the support?
• The school subsequently agreed to issue an unconditional offer?
• The Tribunal was asked to vary its directions because an unconditional offer could not be obtained in time?

I would particularly appreciate hearing from parents who have been through SEND Tribunal proceedings involving Southwark or another London borough. I’m not looking for arguments against the local authority, just practical experiences and guidance on how other parents navigated this situation. Thank you so much for any advice.

Yes, wholly independent schools sometimes give conditional offers, whether that is 1:1 time or otherwise.

And the LA doesn’t always agree to those conditions.

And when in appeal, SENDIST doesn’t always agree to include the provision in F. Are you appealing B&F as well as I? I hope so. Do you have evidence, beyond the school’s offer, that 30hrs 1:1 is required?

With further discussion, sometimes the school agrees to change the conditional offer or make it unconditional. Sometimes they don’t.

You could request SENDIST allows a fall back option. That way, you continue with your current preference (with the conditions if the school will not remove that condition) but, assuming you are appealing B&F as well, if SENDIST decides 30hrs 1:1 is not to be detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP, that offer would be off the table but your fall back option could be considered.

Each case turns on its own facts, so what happens with other cases doesn’t necessary mean the same will happen in your case.

We have approached numerous schools, including mainstream, specialist and independent schools, but many have declined to offer her a place because of the complexity of her needs.

On this part of your post, the schools that are not wholly independent do not need to offer a place in order to be your preference &/or be named in the EHCP. They can be your preference &/or be named even if they object.

Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this. I really appreciate your advice.
Just to clarify, Sections B and F have already been agreed between me and the local authority. The only outstanding issue is Section I.
The independent school has assessed my daughter and confirmed in writing that it considers itself suitable, but its offer is conditional on the LA funding 30 hours of 1:1 TA support.
The LA has refused the funding and considers the school unsuitable. The judge has directed me to provide an unconditional offer or identify an alternative school.
I am currently asking the school to reconsider its condition, as this is the only school that has offered my daughter a place.
Have you personally come across a case where a non-Section 41 independent school changed its conditional offer to an unconditional one?
Also, when you mention requesting a fallback option, do you mean asking the Tribunal to vary its directions while keeping my preferred school as my first choice?
I would be very grateful for any guidance, particularly as my daughter has been out of school for approximately a year.
Thank you again.

Sections B and F have already been agreed between me and the local authority. The only outstanding issue is Section I.
The independent school has assessed my daughter and confirmed in writing that it considers itself suitable, but its offer is conditional on the LA funding 30 hours of 1:1 TA support.

If you and the LA have agreed section F, does it include 30hrs 1:1? If so, then I don’t see what the issue is with the conditional offer and I would query this with SENDIST. The LA has to ensure the provision in F is provided. The 30hrs 1:1 must be provided. However, if the agreed section F doesn’t include 30hrs 1:1, this is your problem and why you are being directed to provide an unconditional offer or identify an alternative school. If this is the case, I would request to continue with the appeal to B&F as well as I. That is because B+F=I. Section I is the logical conclusion of B&F.

Have you personally come across a case where a non-Section 41 independent school changed its conditional offer to an unconditional one?

Yes, I have with further discussion, but that won’t really help you because every case is different.

Also, when you mention requesting a fallback option, do you mean asking the Tribunal to vary its directions while keeping my preferred school as my first choice?

In some cases, not all so it isn’t guaranteed to be allowed as it depends on the case, a fall-back school is allowed. So, for example, if your preference is School A, you could request to keep School A as your first preference, but if SENDIST reject your proposed placement, they could then consider your fall-back option of School B. If you want this, I would reply by the deadline given with your fall-back option and request you wish to be allowed to name this school as your fall-back option. However, this is unlikely to work if the 30hrs 1:1 is not in F.

I would be very grateful for any guidance, particularly as my daughter has been out of school for approximately a year

Is alternative provision in place?

Thank you for your advice. I really appreciate your guidance.
I have checked my daughter’s agreed EHCP. Section F specifies TA support for English and Maths for one hour per subject daily, in pairs or small groups (1:4), and two hours daily for other subjects in small groups (1:4). It also includes some individual interventions.
However, the independent school subsequently assessed her and requested 30 hours of dedicated 1:1 TA support as a condition of admission.
My concern is that my daughter has already been out of school for a very long time and is currently receiving only three hours of education each day.
I am worried that reopening Sections B and F could cause further delays.
In your experience, can I continue pursuing the independent school under Section I without reopening B and F, particularly if the school agrees to issue an unconditional offer?
I would really appreciate your guidance.

If the independent school offers an unconditional offer, then yes, you can continue to pursue the appeal with them as your preference.

However, if they don’t, then they can’t be named because you don’t have agreement for 30hrs 1:1 (you aren’t even disputing it is required) and their offer is dependent on that (they only agree to being named if DD has 30hrs 1:1).

When is your hearing date? If it is imminent, requesting B&F be included in the appeal is likely to see the HD pushed back. If it isn’t imminent, it is unlikely the current date will be vacated and the case relisted.

Do you have evidence, beyond the school’s offer, that 30hrs 1:1 is required?

Thank you for your response. This is really helpful, and I appreciate you taking the time to explain everything.
The Tribunal has already held a case-management hearing, and I have an imminent deadline to provide an unconditional offer from the independent school. The final hearing date has not yet been confirmed.
My daughter has been out of school for a considerable time and is currently receiving only three hours of education each day. I am extremely concerned about anything that could delay her return to full-time education.
Sections B and F were agreed with the local authority before the independent school assessed her.
Having checked her EHCP, Section F specifies teaching assistant support in pairs or small groups (1:4), including one hour each for English and Maths daily and two hours daily for other subjects. It also includes some individual interventions. However, it does not specify 30 hours of dedicated 1:1 TA support.
The independent school subsequently assessed my daughter, met her and confirmed in writing that it considers itself a suitable placement based on her EHCP. However, it made its offer conditional upon funding for 30 hours of dedicated 1:1 TA support.
The local authority has refused that funding and also maintains that the school is unsuitable.
I have supporting evidence from CAMHS recommending TA support as the school considers appropriate, although it does not specifically recommend 30 hours.
I understand that an unconditional offer would remove an important obstacle, but it would not automatically mean the Tribunal would name the school.
I also understand that the Tribunal can decide in my favour even if the local authority continues to oppose my preferred placement, provided the relevant legal requirements are met.
My questions are:

1. If the independent school agrees to issue an unconditional offer, can I continue pursuing it under Section I without reopening Sections B and F?
2. Given that the school has assessed my daughter and confirmed it considers itself suitable, how much weight might the Tribunal give that evidence when the local authority disagrees?
3. Would an unconditional offer, together with evidence explaining how the school can deliver all of Section F, put me in a stronger position to challenge the local authority’s refusal?

I am particularly worried about reopening B and F because of the potential delays. My priority is securing a suitable school placement without my daughter losing even more education. I would really appreciate your thoughts on the best way forward. Thank you again.

If the independent school agrees to issue an unconditional offer, can I continue pursuing it under Section I without reopening Sections B and F?

I am particularly worried about reopening B and F because of the potential delays. My priority is securing a suitable school placement without my daughter losing even more education.

Yes. However, IMO, it is a mistake not to have appealed B&F and it would be a mistake not to request to amend the grounds of appeal now to include B&F in the appeal. B+F=I. Section I is the logical conclusion of B&F. Without appealing B&F, you increase the chance of your preferred placement not being named. I know you want things to be done quickly, but if you don’t also request to amend the grounds of appeal to include B&F, there is a risk DD will be out of school longer. It is also likely B&F are not as watertight as you think. There is a very good reason it is recommended you appeal B&F as well as I.

Given that the school has assessed my daughter and confirmed it considers itself suitable, how much weight might the Tribunal give that evidence when the local authority disagrees?
Impossible to say without seeing the case and evidence. SENDIST will consider all the evidence to decide whether the school is appropriate, whether the LA’s proposed school(s) can meet needs and if it is unreasonable public expenditure. However, at the moment, the school is actually saying they aren’t appropriate without the 30hrs 1:1 and you do not have evidence that is required beyond the school saying it (the CAMHS evidence will not be sufficient) or it included in F and are not disputing F.

Would an unconditional offer, together with evidence explaining how the school can deliver all of Section F, put me in a stronger position to challenge the local authority’s refusal?

Yes, you will need evidence that the school is appropriate.

Thank you again for your advice. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain this.
I understand your concerns about not appealing Sections B and F, and I am considering what you have said.
One thing I wanted to explain is that numerous schools, including independent schools, have already said they cannot meet my daughter’s needs because of the complexity of her EHCP.
The independent school I am pursuing is the only one that has offered her a place, although conditionally. It is a considerable distance from our home, but I am prepared to manage that because my priority is getting her back into suitable education.
The school has assessed her, confirmed in writing that it considers itself suitable and explained how it proposes to arrange the support she needs, including sourcing additional staff and external provision.
However, the local authority has refused to fund the dedicated TA and maintains that the school is unsuitable.
The Tribunal has directed the local authority to consult further schools, but I have not yet been informed of any confirmed suitable alternative. This has been going on for months, and my daughter continues to miss out on full-time education.
My concern is that the local authority may eventually propose a school simply because it has a place available, rather than because it can genuinely meet her needs.
I appreciate that an unconditional offer alone will not guarantee success, and that I will need evidence showing how the school can deliver Section F.
Given these circumstances, do you think there is a reasonable prospect of the Tribunal naming my preferred school if I obtain an unconditional offer and clear evidence that it can deliver all of Section F, even though the local authority opposes it?
And would you still recommend reopening B and F if doing so risks delaying the placement decision?
I would genuinely value your opinion. Thank you again.

One thing I wanted to explain is that numerous schools, including independent schools, have already said they cannot meet my daughter’s needs because of the complexity of her EHCP. The independent school I am pursuing is the only one that has offered her a place, although conditionally.

This isn’t unusual. At all. It is actually very common. Although going back to a point I made previously, for non-wholly independent schools, you don’t need an offer of a place and they can be your preference &/or named in section I even if they object when consulted.

The school has assessed her, confirmed in writing that it considers itself suitable and explained how it proposes to arrange the support she needs, including sourcing additional staff and external provision.
However, the local authority has refused to fund the dedicated TA and maintains that the school is unsuitable.

In terms of the Tribunal, though, the school is not saying they are appropriate based on the current EHCP. You don’t have 30hrs in F, aren’t pursuing that, and don’t appear to have evidence, beyond the school saying it, that it is required. The school are actually saying they can’t meet needs as the EHCP currently stands.

The LA doesn’t have to fund 30hrs 1:1 if it isn’t in F.

The Tribunal has directed the local authority to consult further schools, but I have not yet been informed of any confirmed suitable alternative.

If you haven’t already, it is worth proactively speaking to all schools within 1hr15 (and potentially up to 1hr30 or even 1hr45) that may be consulted whether you think they are suitable or not.

My concern is that the local authority may eventually propose a school simply because it has a place available, rather than because it can genuinely meet her needs.

Yes, this may well happen. They may also change their preference last minute. That isn’t uncommon. However, that doesn’t change you needing a preference, evidence (which should do more than just show the school can provide F) or it being wise to also appeal B&F. And it doesn’t mean SENDIST will agree with the LA.

As an aside to the has a place available part of your sentence, with an EHCP, for non-wholly independent schools, ‘no space’ doesn’t necessarily mean a school can’t be named. Only if it is so full, which is not defined in law, that it is incompatible with the efficient education of others or use of resources,

do you think there is a reasonable prospect of the Tribunal naming my preferred school if I obtain an unconditional offer and clear evidence that it can deliver all of Section F, even though the local authority opposes it?

This is impossible to answer based on the information in this thread. No-one here has seen the evidence, read your and the LA’s cases, or knows what, if any, school the LA proposes.

Yes, I would recommend requesting to amend the grounds of appeal to include B&F.

If the school is named in section I, you can look at transport. You don’t need to manage taking DD.