LEAs avoiding statements because of cost

[streakybacon]

How true is this?

I was at a SEN conference yesterday and during one of the discussion sessions found myself sitting with someone from the SA panel . Avoiding statements for financial reasons came up and this person assured me that it didn't happen in our LEA. I know people on the inside of the SEN system locally and have been told many times that it does happen.

So I was wondering what other people's experiences are of this in other areas. Does it reall happen or is it a myth that's grown out of general difficulties with the statutory assessment system? Producing statments and then enforcing them costs a heck of a lot of money so it would make sense to avoid spending it, especially in the current climate.

Thoughts?

even pre-cuts, our local LEA was a touch overstretched, and I was told when looking at schools for DS that he wouldn't get 1-1 without a statement, and that it was v hard indeed to get a statement. I have heard lots of parents in all areas of the country talk of being fobbed off - "you can't get a statement unless your kid is x years behind academically", "you can't get a statement until your kid is 8" etc. So maybe the process is so strongly gatekeepered that those on the SA panel can convince themselves that finances aren't a motivation?

It is roughly about 3 grand for the statement administration alone in my previous LEA. NHs, SS charges etc, so yes cost is a big factor.

It's no surprise or secret that there are strenuous efforts being made to reduce the number of statements (an FOI request or a quick bit of googling will show you documents from your LEA detailing the fall in statements issues year on year.)

That in itself is no bad thing. In most cases, statements mean nothing. They are hcurned out by the dozen from the smae blueprint.
A small % of parents (like the ones who post here) know their stuff and can ensure thier statement works for them but it often comes at a huge emotional cost as the wrangling and calling to account of involved parties is so exhausting and soul destroying.

If LEAs were quite simply able to do what it is they are meant to do, which is to provide children with an adequate and appropriate education, whatever thier needs, you wouldn't need one.

In the meantime, my advice (as one in this field) is to go throguh it with a fine toothcomb.

Then go through it another 5 times to make sure it is absolutely watertight. Bear in mind that those who issue the statement have no idea or power to ensure that what the statement specifies will happen on a day to day basis.

TheLightPassenger I think you make a valid point about those sitting on the panel convincing themselves that other issues are more relevant than cost, but I reckon the strict boundaries they set must have a financial basis otherwise they'd be supporting all children who needed it, surely? I guess they just accept "Well, that's the rule" without considering whether there are financial reasons for it or not.

It just rather hacked me off yesterday when all the speakers were talking about improving transparency and knowing they could do things better, yet this woman was still insisting that cost isn't a factor when it comes to issuing statements. ALL service provision surely must have to fit in with available budgets or there would be endless resources available and no need to fight for access.

Limiting statements for reasons of cost was an open secret here years ago, when my son was still in school (he's been home educated for three years now), so I can't see how the LEA would be looser about it now in the light of financial cuts.