So why is it that schools seem to be just so against statements/extra help?

[bialystockandbloom]

I see thread after thread about schools being unwilling/uncooperative about seeking extra help, statements - telling parents they won't get a statement, obstructing the process, playing down difficulties during statutory assessment, standing against parents in appeals, etc.

Same in our case - school is acting as a witness against us in our appeal against ds's (rubbish) statement. School promised amazing support before he started there. Now ds is there, they are trying to get out of providing anything. (have been happily taking 25 hours a week worth of funding while providing nothing). But they are also against our own ABA tutors (who we pay for).

I just can't understand why a school would be so against getting additional resources to support pupils who needs it

Am I incredibly naive? Am i missing something fundamental?

Can anyone explain the whole LA/school funding system?

have been happily taking 25 hours a week worth of funding while providing nothing

Thats disgusting and totally disgraceful

but on the other I would say not everyone agrees with ABA

Lunar, I know that. But we chose that school specifically because, before we finally named it on the statement, they reassured us time and time again that they would welcome our tutors, and even employ them as LSAs.

If they were against ABA, fair enough - we would simply not have sent ds there.

What is galling is that since the start of term they have a) gone back on their word about employing our tutors, b) told us not to employ a full week's worth of cover so they could "see how it goes without support", and c) acting as witness against our appeal saying "ds doesn't need ABA".

And yes, in the meantime, he has 2 days a week with no ABA support (and they asked us not to recruit anyone to fill these days), but they don't provide anything.

But that's all an aside. I just can't understand, generally, why (going on the amount of threads about this) schools seem to be so against parents applying for statements. Why would they not welcome the extra funding?

So the school have to fund the first 15 hours of support, regardless of whether a statement specifies 15, 20, or 25 hours? If that's the case, ah it makes sense now...

I was told the school fund the first 5 hours (why a full time statement is 27.5hrs not 32.5). Is this not the case everywhere or at each stage of school (my DS is at Infant school)

Also they tend to do what the LA wants.

I found out (via DPA) that school applied for funding to keep 1 to 1 at 30 hours when my ds was in YR1 but the LA said they would only usually fund 25. Well, school told me that my ds only needs 25 hours and needs to learn independence and how at playtime, the dinner ladies would keep an eye on him etc.

Oh for those innocent days.

The LA's sometimes give schools a budget. They also have a policy alongside it which basically tells the schools they are not to apply for a statement for a child unless said child may need a special school - which is the way it is now in our area.

The LA expect school to got tribunal to say that your child is fine, happy and making progress and therefore does not need what the parents say.

As parents you go through reports which should say what your son needs are and what he needs in terms of provison and you make sure every last important detail is sent to tribunal as something you want included in your sons statement.

Tribunal Panels are usually OK and supportive, although saying that you do get the odd one who isin't so good. It is worth doing.

Lenin, can you phone the LEA and get clarification on what the school should be providing as part of the county legistlation. Do you have an LEA officer?

If it is not in a statement, then school can promise 15 hours but there is actually nothing you can do about them not delivering on it.

Even with a statement, you have to rely on the goodwill of the school as you are not there to ensure that your child gets what he needs. My ds had 25 hours 1 to 1 but there was only his TA in a class of 29 children. His CT was using his TA to improve her career/promotion prospects by showing how well she can handle the class and not use too much of the school's resources. When ds started acting up, she called us to come and look after him in school - this for a child with full time 1 to 1 during class hours.

I just can't understand why a school would be so against getting additional resources to support pupils who needs it

It's all down to cost*

) The threads above explain how schools have budget delegated to them by the LA to support SENs. That money is not 'ring-fenced' so if the school doesn't spend it on SENs they can spend it on other things.

2. Statements are legally binding - the support must be delivered. Much better for school and the LA to have the flexibility to reduce/stop expensive support when budgets are tight. They can't do that with a Statement.

3. Assessing for a Statement takes up a lot of administrative time. It will involve LA Case Officer time and will cost the LA for Ed Pysch services. Better to ignore the fact that a child may need expensive assessment.

4. Ditto for the Annual Review once a Statemnet is issued - more LA Case Officer and more Ed Pysch time required especially at Transition Reviews.

5. Ditto for the LA having to fight parents at Tribunal who want more in the Statement than the LA will deliver - more Case Officer, Ed Pysch and possible LA legal team time.

6. Add to that the cost of actually delivering the support in the Statement - most of which falls to the LA such as SALT, 1:1 TAs etc

7. School staff are employees of the LA. They are effectively under their employers instructions not to cause their employer additional costs by identifying that expensive support may be required.

8. Head teachers / teachers that zealously implement the SEN COP with the expense that incurs their LA employers will not be looked on favourably by their same LA employers when it comes to promtions etc.

9. Statements that specify a level of support that the LA cannot meet within it's own authprity's schools means the LA has to pay other LAs for those special out of county placments. If independant or residential provision is identified it could cost the LA as much as £90K per year - for just one child. That's 90 household's worth of Council Tax expended on one pupil.

10. you may be partially paying for the ABA - but what if all the other parenst want this too - and many won't be able to afford it, however you, in the eyes of the LA, have set a precedent - so they're worried that they will now incur the ABA costs of all the other children who may require it. Much better to try to diminish the benefit of that therapy.

So they lie - i.e

You're child doesn't need a Statement
You're child won't get a Statementt so no point applying
We don't do Statements anymore / in this county/ school / since the Green Paper etc
Statements don't come with money
There is no funding........

Just a sample of the lies that we hear every week on here (and more).

And for those lies I have absolutely no respect for the teaching profession and even less for those callous LA bastards whoses sole concern for our children is how little they can spend on them.

My brother has Asperger's Syndrome (statemented) and left his crappy mainstream primary in the October of his year 6. He and my mum went for an introduction day/tour at his new primary (also mainstream) and there was another lady there who went round with them. Neither my mum or brother recognised her, and she did not seem to recognise them so my mum assumed she was from the new school.

When it came time to leave there was a very awkward pause. It turned out the school didn't really know who she was either as she was my brother's LSA from his old primary who had to move when my brother (and his statement money) left but they had never met (she confirmed this). His old school hired "his" LSA but used her for everything apart from working with him. He made more progress in 8 months there than he did in 4 years at his old money grabbing bastard school.

The LA don't provide funding for statements. They include in their general funding for schools a small amount of additional money to be used for SEN (statements as well as anything else). This money is not ring-renced. If they don't spend it on SEN, they can spend it on a new vegetable garden to attract m/c parents to the school.

Now if a child has a statement that tightly specifies 25 hours of 1:1, the school HAS to legally use some of their SEN money on that child (usually to the tune of 15 hours worth). The tighter the statement likely to be, the more a school will resist as they have less control over their staffing. However, regardless of the tightness of the statement, ultimately the class teacher can still use those hours of support to help other children/classroom management/tidying/making resource etc. under the belief that 'the child doesn't need the amount in the statement really, they just have pushy parents and poor Ollie with parents who can't afford a tribunal has greater needs therefore my conscience is clear re-distributing resorces.

If however, the parents have put their own tutors in, the school and class teacher have less ability to redistribute resources and have to spend yet more money hiring some support for Ollie.

So schools want no statements, but if they HAVE to have them, they support as wooly a statement as possible.

This is something that IPSEA has been writing about for a long time now.
Devolved funding is extremely bad news indeed for these children now who do require statements.

www.ipsea.org.uk/AssetLibrary/News/Briefing%20Challenging%20SEN%20Delegation.pdf is worth reading re devolved funding.

LEA's still have to fund statements, its not correct to suggest otherwise. They still have statutory responsibility re same and they know the law but some of these LEAs actively choose not to follow it.

As WetAugust states, it is down to cost. I would also argue that some schools simply do not want the work associated with implementing such a document.

...so essentially it's just back to the expected us against the school regardless of the SEN then?
We have 30 hrs 1-1 - it wasn't used for our son - they employed someone unqualified - 17 and no idea what even the terms gross and fine motor meant, and she'd go off to any class which needed her - leaving our son in the corridoor on the computer playing Star Wars games.
There were many other failings that mean we now Home Ed - but I do want him to return to a school - at some point - but how the hell do you choose?
How do you know what happens when the doors close, I'd rather a school said they couldn't manage/didn't want him than take him just for the SEN cash in the school coffers.
I have asked for help choosing a school - I have been told to visit all those in our area, and then get back to the SEN Team - but it's not in their 'remit' to point out the most suitable.
I've read the blurb on their webpages, asked other people [but their children don't have my sons disability, so how do they know how he/they will cope?], I am at a loss.
You are on your own, and it's sink or swim, in our experience.

Wet - as ever, you have summed the problem up neatly.

Mycars -we eventually identified a school through a local home ed yahoo group. I figured if home edders thought the school was flexible and committed to individual children, it was worth a look.

Just wanted to say that my experience of the whole statementing process is very different from the stories I read on here.
DS was highlighted as having difficuties with behaviour and social skills at day care nursery aged 3. We visited local primary school and advised them of his difficuties before he joined the nursery. His problems continued to be monitored (IEP's) and in Yr 1, school suggested they apply for a statement. DS was diagnosed as having HF ASD aged 6 and despite being in top group for all subjects his behaviour was (at times) disruptive to the rest of the class and school successfully obtained a statement for 25 hrs 1-1 TA. (Even before the statement was given they had put 1-1 in place.) HT did advise me that LA had only given funding for 18 hrs and he had to find the rest from school budget - but he did - and even got supply TA in if DS's TA was off sick or on a course. DS still has 1-1 at secondary school.
So not all schools are trying to obstruct the process and we never had any difficulties with the LA either - I guess we've been very lucky - if you can say that when you've got 2 statemented children (DD has been at SN school from 2 1/2).
PS Before you all ask where I live and try and move here, the HT of the local Primary retired last year - so things may have changed!!!!!!