Help me to keep 1:1 support!

[TheTimeTravellersWife]

I need to produce a cogent, snappy argument to counter the LA argument that DD's 1:1 support in school should be reduced, in order to save money reduce her dependence on her LSA and develop her independence.

She has ASD, can't read, can't write, has learning difficulties, dyspraxia, happy in mainstream primary only because she has LSA support.

Annual review recommends reducing her 1:1. She has a completely differentiated curriculum, a "time out" space to go to work, when it all gets too much.

But my brain is fried and I am floundering to find a good strong response! She has a skilled LSA who knows her well and I am confident that she steps back and only supports her as much as she needs, but Ed Psych observed in class and told me that the LSA was too much hands on, and that it was stifling DD developing independent learning skills.

Suggested that she could do paired reading with another child in her class, rather than with her LSA, FFS!

Which is a load of crap, basically!

My argument is that her LSA knows her very well and is trained and that without 1:1 support she is totally unable to access even her differentiated curriculum and that sitting in the class unsupported, doing nothing will not improve her independence skills! And that other children are there to learn, not to teach my DD to read!!

But I am struggling to put it a little better than that!

Can you use the Equality Act here as well?

There is a significant crossover between SEN legislation and Equality obligations and the Equality Act provides 'fresh eyes' to look at such issues and can add extra weight. It is all, as yet, unexplored in terms of caselaw.

By this I mean that you can argue about:

(i) From the standard SEN point of view, why your child's educational needs require 1:1. You would have to look at whether she is making progress with the 1:1. If not, what is the argument that reducing that support? How is that supposed to help? If she can't achieve progress with the help, is the answer to reduce it or reframe it? What do school think? If she is making progress, why on earth would you take away something that is working? How is that cost-effective in the long-term? Working to improve independent learning doesn't mean removing/reducing support and leaving the child to it, it means changing the ways of working.

(ii) From an Equality Act point of view, if your child's needs are disabilities, then there is an added reason to provide that support as this may mean the support constitutes a reasonable adjustment to prevent detrimental discrimination. This means that you could argue that removing this support, without effective and justifiable alternatives, places your daughter at a detrimental disadvantage because of her disability - like taking away a ramp for someone with a wheelchair because you think it's ok for them access a place in a different way. Is it ok or is this unfair and unrealistic.

You are right. This is about money.

There''s some interesting stuff on this website

a.t. is spot on. FWIW I'd be quoting chunks of her IEPs, the last few if you need, and stating precisely what progress in terms of levels, whether P scale or NC levels, that your dd has achieved with support, and exactly where that support is positioned in order to have made that progress. State that without it, the progress won't be possible. Critically, children with ASD often need specific 'translation' instructions, to give them the key words from the task as they are unable to figure out how the class teacher's instruction to the whole class actually applies to them. A skilled LSA will hardly realise they're doing it but it's an essential part. The other non-negotiable for children on the autistic spectrum - and indeed many others, is that they are supported with even minor changes to routine, and essentially through unstructured times (playtime etc) and transitions. They will also deal with sensory issues, such as over stimulation and you might need to state where your dd is in the process of being able to recognise for herself when something is starting to fry her brain (for want of a proper expression at this time of night) - without support, most simply couldn't do it as their self-advocacy skills are too poor, even if they recognised it themselves which is perhaps unlikely.
the SENCO might be able to help you out with more detail of her actual provision, and when you know this then consider how much moving from a to b is involved, dealing with other children, how much pressure is on her to interact and how much needs facilitation or support from her LSA. If you are involved with CAMHS or similar, then alert them, as they may be able to support you as well, with statements of how her anxiety will be dealt with (or not). I am absolutely astounded that the Ed Psych has not seen fit to advise the LSA, given that it's part of their role, and if indeed the LSA needs training to offer 'graduated support' then surely they should be providing that, not punishing your dd by reducing the actual amount of support. That's b#llocks!!

Find an expensive special school which has a high qualified teacher :pupil ratio 'to reduce her dependence on LSA support'

Get the fee list. And then state you are also ok with the current situation.

My DD reads to a Year 6 kid every day ( as well as a TA)

It's good for the year 6 kid, builds their confidence etc.

And it gives DD extra reading practice.

However, the problem is, is that DD doesn't Really need 'reading practice' she needs to be taught to read. Which the year 6 kid can't do as well as an adult.

The year 6 kid can't take initiative, ie change the book if it's too hard or too easy, nor can she work out what the next thing DD needs to be taught is.

Mmm...I think you need to first of all think really carefully about what your DD needs, and THEN how to achieve what she needs.

I think there is overall a tendency to think that more support (ie. 1:1)= better support. However, if the 'vehicle for delivery' of support is wrong, then adjusting the amount of it is going to do nothing for the child. A bit like getting a bigger boat when the destination is reached by car, or upgrading to a people mover when the destination is on water.

The SEN CoP doesn't say 'more support' or even '1:1 support'. It says:

"Special educational provision means:
(a) for children of two or over, educational provision which is additional to,
or otherwise different from, the educational provision made generally for
children of their age in schools maintained by the LEA, other than special
schools, in the area" SEN Code of Practice Pg 6

So, as parents, its important that we don't argue 'my child has SEN, therefore they need 1:1 support, because the SEN CoP says that SEN= more support', because we are missing half of the information.

An example, in DD1's Special School, is that her school is very well resourced with SALT. We have 3 NHS SALTS who are based at DD's school, and they also consult and give SALT for children in other schools. But, essentially, if you need to speak with a SALT, you can just phone the school.

However, they have changed their practice. They used to give direct SALT 1:1. Then they realised that a) the support they were able to give was not efficient, and not frequent enough. Children with significant SEN need that routine to build on new knowledge. b) the motivation for SALT wasn't very strong, because the SALT wasn't that important to the children. They only saw him/her once per week, say, or even every day for 10 minutes, but then the rest of the time they forgot them.

So, instead, they do 'communication groups' in class. In that group, they model the 'next step' techniques in the group session, and then for the rest of the week/fortnight, the teachers and LSAs use those techniques all day, every day. The SALT has more time to assess and monitor progress, and the teaching staff can pop in to see them if they have any concerns. Additionally, if they feel that there is something specific that a child needs to work on 1:1, they then give 1:1 SALT to that child in addition.

The pivotal point of your argument is pinned on whether the support your DD gets at the moment is a) effective b)sufficient. You have an EP who is saying 'this support is actually hindering your child'. And you are saying 'this support is what my child needs'.

I think, if it were me, I would be trying to find a way that we could meet in the middle, unless I was sure that only that provision would work. I've said before that DD1 needed 1:1 completely at pre-school, and I thought she would at school. Now, she is at special school, and she doesn't get 1:1 support. She is in a class of 10 with 5-6 teaching staff. She copes well. BUT her environment is just right for her. It would actually be cheaper for her LA to give her 1:1 in mainstream school, but it wouldn't meet her needs.

SO, is it 1:1 your DD needs, or is it something else? Or a combination of reduced 1:1 and something else? If you are sure it is just 1:1, then previous posters are right, you can get your way by proposing something reasonable but much more expensive, usually. If you are at all doubtful that 1:1 alone will meet your DD's needs, you need to look around and see what provisions are available.

The decision as you describe it is based on one EP's observation, and I suspect only over a short period of time. Worth demanding a second opinion?

Thank you all for your replies, lots of food for thought. I am going to make an appointment to go and see the SENCO and have a chat with her and DD's class teacher; I would like to hear their opinions, because they have never mentioned any concerns to me about DD being over supported.

My basic argument to that is if the TA is causing dependency you need a better, more trained and more qualified one. Good TA's can support a child 100% and that 100% support can be 100% about supporting her to be independent, to teach her how to learn from the mainstream environment faster.

Star is spot on. But this 'over provision' argument is obviously becoming a popular one with LAs and our LA tried and succeeded in arguing this to a stupid Tribunal where the chair accepted that increasing hours was over provision - even though the application of current hours put the LA, and school, in breach of DS's daily statement requirements.

I suppose it has the benefit of arguing for reduced hours while looking like you are doing it in the child's best interests. Not like those nasty parents who just want to undermine their child's attempts to grow up.

A child with ASD cannot learn by being plonked in a social environment.

If they could they wouldn't be able to GET a dx of ASD.

Independency needs to be taught, and Children with don't learn easily when not taught, so in order for your child to learn independency they need a high level TActhat understands about child development, to be educational in nature rather than supervisory and to be provided during all your child's opportunities to learn.

Hth.

The LA might quote the Lamb report that says TAs are not working as they cause dependency. However, his conclusion was very different to how LAs have chosen to interpret it. He suggests better training. LAs suggest disbanding.

It is all about cutting costs, not developing DD's independence. She is very fortunate to have a very good TA who the class teacher confirms knows when to take a back seat and when to step in to support her. My argument is that her TA actually facilitates her developing independence, rather than hampering it.
I will just have to wait and see what the amended statement says and then take it from there, but at least I can make strong representations in my parental views (although I am convinced that my LA never read them, they probably just sit there in their ivory towers offices making paper aeroplanes out of them or something)

"A child with ASD cannot learn by being plonked in a social environment.

If they could they wouldn't be able to GET a dx of ASD".

Excellent point Star.

ds2 is less indipendant without his TA.
She is there to prompt, check understanding & facilitate his access to the curriculum equal to his peers.

Without his TA support he is lost & solely reliant on waiting for the teacher to notice him sitting staring in to space totally excluded.

You need specific examples of strategies that the TA supports your dd with enabling her to be an included member of the class & then specifics of how & wht she would not cope & be an active member of the class without this suport.
Dont let them set her up to fail.

You can ask the school to list the activities which she can access fully independently and for how long.
Its a skill based issue.
eg can she follow a whole class instruction from the class teacher without having it broken down by the LSA?
If so can she follow every instruction or only certain ones?
If not can she follow a small group instruction?
Or can she only follow individual instructions.
This determines if she can learn in a large group, small group or 1:1

Can she stay on task without LSA support? If so for how long? Does she have a current target time eg sitting on carpet and paying attention to teacher, or working independently? Get the school to time how long she can do this.

There may be activities she can access eg singing, PE or more structured tasks but others she cannot do without help

Our LA love this whole TA=dependency argument
DS's ABA tutor supports him all the time he is in school but that includes time when she fades out but these times are really short eg 1-2 minutes

If you can work out she can only work unsupported for 1-2 mins its difficult for them to say she can cope without a LSA/TA

For social stuff it depends if has skills eg to initiate and sustain play with a peer. How frequently is she initiating? How long is she staying engaged with the peer / game?

Once you have worked out what she can do - then the rest of the time she needs a TA. If the TA is doing too much - which they might be eg might be prompting her all the time rather than letting her do the skill independently then that is a training issue for the LSA not a reason to reduce the LSA

If she would just stim if left unsupported then your argument is are they saying it is ok for her not to be engaged in anything productive for whatever % of time she will be without a TA

The reason LAs hate kids with autism is that they have no physical or medical needs usually, often their IQ is normal but they are just so distractible they need high levels of 1:1 to stay engaged. So in my experience they are seen as being undeserving of 1:1 as for some reason not being engaged with learning is not considered a good enough reason to have support.

Our SEN child is loosing his TA

Our son has SEN (Autism) and his EHC plan entitles him to a FT equivalent TA support in his mainstream school. He had the same TA since he began school, he made an amazing progress in his learning thanks to the support he has in school and at home.
We have a new head in our school, who has not extended contract for approx 13 TA and SEN support staff this school year.
Last Friday our SENCo told us that our son's TA will be leaving by the end of this school year, his TA joined in and said that this was not her choice.
Our son is very anxious about this change and we are worried about his learning as well as his mental health as adjusting to a new provision promised to us means a mixture of support.
We understand that this is all part of the new headmasters saving plan, however he did invest money in his new office, new school sign bearing his name and a school business manager.
What can we do to keep his TA please?
Any suggestions will be much appreciated.

Nat360

There should have been a (annual) review, and a discussion about how DS's needs had changed and therefore there should be a change of provisions in the EHC plan, and a draft amended EHC plan issued for you to consider. From what you say, it does not sound like this has happened and until then, the LA has a statutory duty to provide what is in the EHC plan, and its not up to the head to unilaterally change support.

Do not get dragged into discussions with the school about funding - none of that is your concern. Your concern is DS gets what he has been assessed as needing, and is legally entitled to in his EHC plan - and really the people to talk to about this are the LA.

I would write to the head and the director of education (or children's services or 0 - 25 Services or whatever they call themselves in your LA) and say that the LA has a statutory duty to make the provisions in DC's EHC plan and you will be seeking legal advice with a view potentially to judicial review (High Court action).

I would ring up either the Coram Children's Legal Centre or Simpson Millar, both of whom have a franchise for legal aid in education law and ask them if they would look at your son's case for you with a view to judicial review - they will want to look at the exact wording in DS's EHC plan. The 1:1 TA needs to be properly specified, without any weasel words. They will tell you you have to ring up the Civil Legal Aid gateway 0845 345 4 345 to go through the hoops to get legal aid funding. The funding is assessed on DS, and assuming they have no assets nor income except for benefits like DLA, they are eligible for legal aid in education cases. Obviously, DC is not capable of instructing lawyers - you do it for them, as a friend in litigation.

There will need to be a pre-action protocol letter (or Letter Before Action) to the LA. Parents do have to pay for that, and after that everything is covered by DC's legal aid. SOS!SEN has an education solicitor as their Chief Executive, and I believe that SOS!SEN can do the pre-action protocol letter for parents - I suggest you ring their Helpline and discuss it with them.

LAs don't get legal aid, and providing the EHC plan is properly specified, they usually back down before the papers get to the High Court - ie within a matter of weeks. I believe its recognised that children's education is important and the cases are expedited for judicial review.

It is possible to go through the LA's complaints procedure and eventually make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman, but judicial review is far quicker.

Say you think they are right and ask for a private special school that teaches in small groups of peers using specialist techniques which will increse her independance. They cost a bloody fortune and they might settle for the TA she needs

Dear MontStMichel and Grasspigeons,

Thank you very much for your kind suggestions. Our son's EHC plan entitles him to 25hours funded support per week.
At our last meeting, only few weeks ago, there was no mention about the change in his TA, hence we were not specific regarding her support in his EHCP plan.
The plan is pretty vague and mentions various support group interventions as well as some 1:1. The plan also says that he would not have made such progress without his TA support.
Spoke to LA today, they said they do not get involved in how the school is spending the funding provided unless there is an issue with his progress.
We will complain.
Thank you both very much, best wishes

The LA is trying to pass the buck to the school! As I said, they have a statutory duty to make the provisions in the EHC plan. If it is a maintained school, they can tell the school to make sure DC gets his 1:1!

I would follow up the telephone conversation with an email to the LA officer, confirming what was said and give them 10 days to make their comments, or you will assume they accept it. Better to do things in this situation in writing, than over the phone! Telephone call conversations can be denied.

Do not get involved in discussions about funding, as they are not your concern.

I suggest you seek advice from one of the organisations in my previous post on judicial review.