Persuading LEA to assess after all?

[mariamariam]

We are trying to arrange a meeting before term ends. A voluntary worker is coming, for moral support only. I think the competent and moderately helpful ed psych may 'pop in', they do the usual wishy-washy written reports but their verbal advice has always been spot on.

Has anyone succeeded without tribunal in persuading the LEA to assess a complex child (where a lot of problems are superficially masked, but the need for a statement is obvious once you scratch the surface)? And if so, how did you do it? Jedi mind tricks?

Before anyone asks, yes, SEND is in the pipeline but will be forever and a day.

Yes. DS passes for NT in school. Phoned LEA after letter of 2nd refusual. Following 1st refusual LEA learning support advisor visited due to concerns raised over lack of progress and said the LEA needed evidence to calculate rate of progress during a wave 3 intervention - application focused on inadequate progress as still in assessment and have no diagnosis.

Said on phone that surprised at outcome of 2nd application as thought the matter was straightforward. Turned out that my application and attached thesis had not been read - only the school predictions and, as I pointed out, they contradicted standardised test results. Papers were returned to panel and within 3 days there was a revised decision to assess.

Do you have or can you get evidence of inadequate progress ie less than 2 sats sublevels each year (regardless of comparitive position)? Cast iron reason to assess but most parents do not know what they have and schools/LEAs will dismiss obvious regression as apparent lack of progress.

Thank you very much. Progress levels are scored very exactly and conveniently at around 2 sub-levels per annum per subject

But SEAL, PSHE etc are not included. Plus think panel were sent v little. Will see if the read the reports tomorrow.

You need to go through the COP and make sure your documents include the EXACT wording, followed by illustrations.

I'm not sure how the system works in England, but when we've been banging our heads against the proverbial brick wall, we've always got in touch with our local councillors for advice. It's generally been helpful and moved us into a place of better communication with whichever dept we're dealing with.

Schools lie about SATs attainment (based on teacher assessment not objective measures) - a slight exaggeration of one level can make the difference between adequate or inadequate progress. Do you have standardised reading/spelling age assessments (should be on front page of IEP) from which you can calculate rate of progress? Rate of progress should be 6 months per calendar year (average/below average ability) or if less should at least match the previous rate - ie only 3 months per year but steady and so gap not increasing.

Unless you are able to argue that you do actually meet their criteria but they have made a 'mistake', it will probably require an appeal in the way that starlight suggests. Refusal is always the opening move, put in an appeal and they might agree to assess. Find out what the LEA want (do they want the school to do something they have not yet tried, to collect further evidence etc). Even where they refuse, they acknowledge issues (whilst arguing that they are not bad enough or don't affect maths/literacy attainment). Do what they want, collect the evidence at the same time as appealing. All helps to build your case.

Thank you, star. I was hoping evidenced quotations from the CoP could wait for now, while I see if informal round table chats are doomed to fail. Herts craziness aside, do you think demonstrating recent detailed study of all things tribunal related is likely to backfire?

Creatovator, I was wondering the same thing. I met the councillor when they were last canvassing for votes and quizzed them in detail re ASD provision. They probably have me noted down to avoid now, ive noticed we don't seem to get any religious callers or salesmen these days either...

Keepon, nothing standardised, just the usual NC level estimates. LEA's argument is that school are aware of the issues, taking action, monitoring. Since senco says this is "effective" and progress is "adequate", mum must be lying, deluded, inadequate or abusive mistaken to be insisting ds needs more assessments (my paraphrase)

So, consensus is that the meeting will be doomed to uselessness? I really am tempted to just give up, perhaps catching up with my housework will help ds more than banging my head off a brick wall

Maria, I honestly don't think it makes any difference at what point you reveal your knowledge of policies/cop etc.

You're probably right star, I keep accidentally thinking I'm dealing with humans, albeit in a crazy SEN game with unclear rules. I get thrown when so many apparently ordinary employees suddenly transform into robots, caring carrots or frank psychopaths, basically I'm fed up playing now and want to throw my toys.

I mean no difference about the outcome, but you might ensure deadlines are met and a level of thoroughness and concrete things to argue with so a bit less of a delay.

It won't frighten anyone though.

Maria there's usually at least one councillor who has disabilities, ASD, or carers as one of their things. If you can find out who it is in your area then they'll know who to contact and how to work the system from that angle. It's certainly another avenue to try. When we've done it the councillors have sent emails out on our behalf and copied us in on them. Then they've copied us in on any answers. All helps with evidence.

Ah well, shame i cant frighten the LA officer with the sencop, but tbh i thought as much. He looks as though even an unscheduled visit from Sauron's army (from Lord of the Rings) wouldn't shorten his tea-break.

I did worry about the CoP accidentally scaring the more helpful types. Whose jobs are hard enough as it it, with no resources, intransigent psychopathic bosses and constant hassle from sharp-elbowed ingrates like myself

Hmm, will get googling about the local crew then, Thanks, creatovator.

You don't hit the nice guys over the head with the COP. You refer to it as a shared agenda to guide you all. If can request their expertise in defining a section that you secretly believe they need to -read for the first time-- be reminded of.