Do you have a good reason for Ed Psych to be in TAC meeting?

[2006hildy]

DS 5 dx'd ASD Delayed Expressive Language.

I need to have a good reason to keep Ed Psych involved because DS too delayed developmentally but is making progress. They said they would attend if I have one.

I feel comforted the more people involved in DS case.

Anybody got any reasons?

Do you want to apply for a statement for educational needs, or do you want an EP to do assessments for these?

Sorry OP, I don't understand what it is you want.

EP says DS does not need statement for educational needs or assessments as we are in Hertfordshire. Statements do not come with funding. I just want EP to keep an eye on DS so that when he stops making progress there has been involvement.

EP is telling you a load of rubbish - apply yourself. Have a look at the IPSEA website.

The EP is right that most statements don't come with funding, not for ASD anyway, well, not in my county (Hampshire). You can still apply for one though for reasons other than funding - the school have to pay for whatever it is your child needs out of their own budget if they don't get any extra cash.

I don't know what you expect the EP to do though. Are they the best person for delayed expressive language problems. Wouldn't a SALT be better?

Sorry BBB, but the EP really is talking rubbish, at least her words are nonsensical.

Statements provide a detailed list of needs and than the list of provision to meet that need. The duty to fulfil that lies with the LA.

If an identified educational need is a helicopter lift to the seaside every Saturday then that is what will be provided. Whether that provision is paid for by the LA or given for free by the RAF is really not the parent's concern. The fact that it is written in the statement means it needs to happen. The OP should have no interest or concern about how it is resourced or paid for and as a result is ridiculous that the EP is talking to her about the internal arrangements and financial management systems of the LA.

TAC meeting is about making decisions about the needs of the child and how best to investigate and/or provide for these. Surely therefore the person best able to advise on these things would be an Ed Psych as that is what their job is all about. In terms of getting them at a TAC meeting it is irrelevant whether or not you should/will statement your child.

I agree however with the above posters - how provision is funded is not your concern. What is done to help your child is and getting it put into a legal document so that the school have an obligation to meet these needs properly should be a priority for you unless you feel his needs can be and are already being met. If you believe he needs more help then get the paperwork in. If the authority agree to assess the EP will have to be involved then anyway. Be prepared to be told a lot of "he doesn't qualify, isn't bad enough" etc and be prepared to appeal every step of the way if necessary. IPSEA is a great site for help in what to do.

Starlight - in Hampshire (and possibily in Hertforshire if the EP is in anyway right) there are two types of statement - high and low incidence. High incidence statements don't come with any additional funding and the school finances all the requirements from their SEN budget. Low incidence statements come with some funding which is controlled by the LEA. High incidence covers mild to moderate ASD and low incidence, severe ASD not something an EP is qualified to ascertain.

As I say, you don't get a statement to get funding - where the money comes from is the school's concern not the OP's. It is what the statement asks for that is important. I would assume that the EP thinks that it makes no difference if the OP has a statement because her DS won't qualify for that additional funding therefore a statement serves no purpose - that of course sidesteps the additional legal protection it gives.

However, that isn't the purpose of the TAC, is it and I am not sure what the EP can really do. (Are we alone in never having seen an EP for ASDs)?

BBB, my DS has mild Autism and is funded to the tune of around £20k.

That is in additional TA time to that devolved to the school and weekly OT and SALT.

A Herts EP told us the same. That there would be no point in applying as statements don't come with funding. But we got an assessment and statement without having to appeal.

2 of mine who have ASD have statements of SEN.

I think Hampshire is applying blanket policies which are illegal.

I agree Star!

An EP can ascertain if ASD is mild, moderate or severe by doing formal testing - unless your child is too young or too uncooperative with testing. If the latter than they almost certainly need a high level of support.
My son has moderate ASD and gets low incidence funding on a Statement for 35 hours per week support
We were given the brush off and told he had minimal needs, was too bright to need a statement etc etc.

Don't expect too much from this meeting - the first meeting is usually just an opportunity for the LA to lay out the line it wants professionals to take e.g. this is a child who does not need a statement etc and mark its territory. You will probably come out of this meeting more frustrated than when you went in.

Use it to gather information e.g. what progress is expected, what approaches will be used, what training has school had, who will provide support and ongoing training / oversight, how will progress be measured, when will it be reviewed, are they going to use P scales, how will they measure progress with social skills, how will they manage / improve behaviour.
Then go ahead and apply for a statement anyway as the only way of ensuring any of this actually happens.

An EP isn't qualified to diagnose ASD so I don't see how they ascertain the severity. I would have issues if they tried. Perhaps that we have never seen one!

Hampshire aren't doing anything illegal! You have to have a structure to start an assessment but each case is looked at on its own merit - they have been at great pains to stipulate that. Moderate ASD might well not need a extra funding if there were no other issues. The other issues are of course taken into account when trying to work out a high or low incidence statement.

At DS1's school the TA time comes out of the general SEN budget (or school budget since the spend on SEN is double what the budget is). Unless you need to get one to one time for a vast proportion of the week, as one child will do soon, there is no extra money. In fact there are children with behavioural problems who have a lot of TA time who don't have a statement and the school still has to fund these children from their budget. It certainly isn't as simple as saying TA time = funding.

I'm not sure what you mean. If the TA isn't funded by someone are you saying that they are volunteers?

A statement of SEN is to identify and set out provision for a child's needs not to set out funding.

If Hampshire are saying 'x has y type of autism and therefore won't get a statement and if they do no-one is going to provide the requirements as written in the statement', then that is illegal.

Just because someone has mild autism does not mean that they don't need additional resources to what the school can provide.

The school fund the TAs out of the general budget. That is what happens to children with no statement and high incidence statements. The general budget does include a percentage for SEN but it is usually insufficient to cover the amount of TA time that the school needs to provide. It is worked out on a formula not a child by child basis.

But that is not the same as saying statements don't come with funding.

They may not come with funding 'for the school' but they do come with funding 'for the child' as if it is written in the statement it HAS to be provided. The LA and school can argue the toss about who pays but it is immoral to involve the parent in this.

No precisely wasuup300. That is what I keep saying. The EP said that the OP wouldn't need them because they weren't getting a statement because they wouldn't get extra funds for it. It may well be true that there are no extra funds as evidenced by Hampshire but that does not mean that there can't be a statement because the funding isn't really the business of the family who are applying for the statement. Their interest is in what the statement provides for so the EP in this case is wrong. I don't think anybody is aruing that.

Cross post Starlight.

And yes it is the same as saying the statements don't come with funding because it isn't the statement that attracts the extra funding, the funding would be the same whether not not a statement was in place based on the formula that the LEA use to work out the general SEN budget as part of the whole school budget. Don't forget the school has the right to refuse to take a statemented child if to do so would be to the detriment of the other children in the school so the fact that a statement doesn't come with funding could allow the school to come with this get out clause. It is used very rarely and the LEA would have to see an extremely good case for it but it can happen.

Anyway, this is getting away from the point of the OP who we seem to have scared off.

The funding to the 'school' perhaps but not the funding to the 'child'. The statement secures the money necessary to meet the child's needs for the child with the statement. Therefore the statement brings funding to the child. Whether that funding comes from the schools or the LA's budget is really of no concern to the parent.

No school would ever get away with refusing a child because their LA was not providing enough money. No tribunal would rule in favour of that.

That may be the way it works in your area but not here. Not all statements have funding. There are 2 statemented children in DS's school. Neither of them bring extra funding. The school has to use the TAs they already had before those children arrived, to meet their needs. I am sure that non-statemented children on SA and SA+ will probably have missed out some one-to- one time or they are working in smaller groups instead. The statemented children are the priority so they get first dibs on the resources available.

No as I have repeatedly said, this has nothing to do with the parents. The point was merely that the EP says that the OP's DS doesn't need to bother to get a statement because it won't provide any additional money. The bit about the funding might well be true but it ignores the point of the statement being to provide a certain level of help for the child's needs. I am not sure why the OP thinks the EP would help when they clearly don't understand the point of a statement!

Those two TAs are funded. They are used for the 2 children with statements. Therefore those statements brought the children the funding of the TAs.

Another 2 children who need help but who have not got statements have lost the support of the TAs. Therefore the two children with the statements got the TAs/funding whereas the two without statements did nit. Therefore, statements bring funding, even if that funding was from the schools own already delegated budget or if they had to sell their playground equipment to afford it.

The implication in what the OPs EP was that her child would not get anything extra than what he was getting already. He may not do, but if a Statutory Assessment showed he needed more than he was receive g then he WOULD get it, and it WOULD be funded even if the schools overall budget did not increase. The schools overall funding arrangements and whether the LA gave them more should have absolutely no impact on whether the needs of the child are met. If the school/EP etc. thinks this is unfair there are channels for them to use ti address it. They should not be fob ing off a parent and trying to convince her there is no money.

Provision is supposed to be needs led, not finance led. Anything else is illegal. LAs and schools cannot simply say the money isn't there so there is no point in asking. LAs have a statutory duty to provide it.