LA requesting extra assessment in run-up to tribunal

[KOKOagainandagain]

Can anyone tell me whether the LA is allowed to request extra assessments after the period of SA and when the final statement is being appealed at tribunal?

LA did not conduct SALT or OT assessment during SA despite the Medical Advice concluding difficulties fine motor control, sensory processing and sociocommunication. We submitted a private SALT report (including DISCO) in October. The solicitors have now asked me to consent to these assessments because they need to see if they agree or disagree with independent reports. They originally wanted EP,Comm Pad and SALT, then added OT and then seened to back down on the OT. Surely they should have done this earlier? Would this be the likely view of tribunal? Independent and GOSH reports were submitted to the LA before the final statement was issued but were 99.9% ignored. I thought that the LA had a duty to resolve any disagreements and provide support for how they had reached a decision before they issued the final statement.

The Appeal is on the basis that part 2 does not describe all DS1's needs. The LA grounds for response to the Appeal is based first and foremost on their claim that part 2 'accurately describes' his SEN. So why do they need additional assessment?

Sorry, yes they can.

However you might want to get advice on whether assessing a child for the purpose they state is a valid or ethical one.

Contact time with such professionals is supposed to be for the benefit of the client, not the provider. Pretty sure most code of conducts state this.

Have you an Indi EP?

i agree with yes they can - remember though they cannot do the same tests if your report is less than 6 months old. my LA went a got an independent OT report and it was even worse than mine so sometimes it can work in your favour. the LA backtracked big time and didnt call her to the tribunal.

they also did something similar with me re SALT - no SALt report was obtained during the stat assessment. my son had been discharged at age 5 from salt - hes 9 now. the paed did say that he struggled to understand questions. then as part of my appeal i got a independent SALT report which stated he had a specific speech delay etc. served the report on the LA a month before the final deadline. they did nothing but then once final date passed then got their knickers in a twist about it. a judge told them to stop being ridiculous and if they wanted their own report they could get one. they sent it to the NHS who refused to comment on it as they dont know him. at the tribunal they agreed the SALt report as mine only one on the table - however a few days post tribunal they have now referred him to the NHS. i got a copy of the referral yesterday and it is full of venom. going on about how noone else has ever suggested he has any SALt issues except for this independent report - he has ASD for gods sake. its clear that once the SALT goes into the statement the LA are going to move to get it out as soon as possible.

with my independent report post emergency review they just ignored it. further down the tribunal line they went with their OT report but have never given any reasons for doing so and ive just come out of tribunal and they still havent given a reason. I know the code of practice describes how things should be done but the LA just disregard it.

you could ask what the purpose of the SALT report is especially if its still quite close to you having yours done. however, if you refuse they could i guess apply to the tribunal and get an order for it to be done - horrible to hear i know and tribunal is a dirty business and it just feels like a big load of game playing over a blinking child.

Yes, they do have a duty to ensure they have considered all the evidence as part of a SA process and to iron out areas of dispute.

However, as Star says, this does not stop them asking for further assessments and it is hard to reject them as they will make it sound like they are doing it in an effort to settle things.

Star is dead right though, these assessments must be for the benefit of the child and I don't know why they would need a Comm Paed involved.

I would ask them to explain their failure to conduct these assessments prior to the issue of the statement in accordance with their statutory obligation under the Education Act 1996 and the SEN COP. They should not be waiting until after the issue of a statement to seek advice on what his needs are!

Ask them to set out specifically what the assessments will be and explain why on earth they need the community Paed. That is just too much.

Tell them you have sought legal advice.

I hope all know me well enough to know I am not advertising, but Polly Sweeney at Irwin Mitchell has just done the most exceptional job on my Tribunal and I would thoroughly recommend her even if you just want a stern letter sending.

Buggers . Don't want to consent unless I really have to but I don't want to look obstructive. But IPSEA advised that I can give provisos by consenting and appearing to be reasonable by not requiring the LA to get a tribunal ruling. Sticks in the throat because it is not ethicial - they want me to consent to their collecting evidence to use against me and DS1. They've had months to carry out these assessments.

Yes we have an indi EP assessment next week and she is a witness for tribunal. So our EP assessments will be before theirs and ours is tribunal experienced and recommended by chosen indi school.

just wanted to add that my appeal was also that part 2 did not reflect his needs and the LA responded back that yes it did even though no OT or SALt were done at the time. post tribunal, OT and SALT are now both in the statement as they conceded both on the morning of the tribunal plus he needs described in part 2 are substantially different to the needs originally described

Thanks for the advice.

It was only when the case was passed over to the lawyers last week that they requested consent to updated EP and comm paed report and additional SALT/OT.

DS1 actually as an appt with the comm paed next week and the solicitors have said that they will send an assessment for use in the proceedings rather than an additional appt. Is there anything in particular I should say at this appointment? Are they requesting that she repeat the assessment she did for SA? I can't see the point as she is hardly likely to disagree with her own report from August - especially as DS1 has since been seen/assessed by Margo Sharp and Daphne Keen.

I see EP as being the main threat as it is supposed to be an update of the report that recommended mainstream and only referred to SpLD. Given that I have to consent I was thinking of requesting that the lea EP observe him during a home tutoring session as the formal assessments can't be repeated and this would be one less visit. DS1 is not in a school and so can't be observed there. I would even have no objection to getting the views of the tutor - m/s school tutors did not work (4 tutors since November) and the lea had to bring in a specialist tutor.

Do you think it would be likely that nhs SALT or OT assessments could be reported on by the final deadline? Could they be submitted up to the hearing? I'd rather go to tribunal with no other reports on the table. I don't fear that the assessments would produce different results but that a different interpretation would be advanced.

I will make the point that the LA appear to have issued the statement before rather than after seeking assessment if and when I consent and make sure that the exchange of correspondence in this matter is made available to tribunal. The la should be made to go to tribunal on the strength of the final statement rather than agreeing amendments purely on the basis of parental appeal.

btw we are renting atm and given that DS1 can no longer go upstairs or into his room due to the age (500 years) and layout (l-shaped) we need to move. What would happen if we moved before the hearing (changing local m/s) but staying in the same county?

Sorry for all the questions - I dream them all up at 3am I have actually switched to going to bed early so that I can spend a few hours fretting in the middle of the night without being knackered the next day.

bjk - have they put in SALT and OT but still saying that provision can be met in m/s? Or did they also concede specialist but then argue the m/s unit? If they are arguing m/s can the lea switch this to specialist at tribunal?

Their SLT/OT reports will either be pretty thorough and specialist, so likely similar to yours. Or be quite sketchy and general, which means your SLT can demonstrate their irrelevance if coming as a witness. Community paed you already have, this is just an update.

LA ed psych can be tricky, unless they are able to stand up to their employer and genuinely look at the evidence (some do, especially close to retirement). Hard to refuse it though.

yes they agreed in on the basis Ot would be bought in and the school as if by magic will in 6 weeks time have suspended OT equipment! they will also buy in the SALT. we argued he needs special school as he had already attended this school and he is clearly not a mainstream child and mainstream hasnt worked for him. up to the start of the tribunal the LA had named a mainstream school and they could meet his OT needs as they were non educational. they then conceded this and put the OT in part 3. the head of the mianstream then gave evidence and just announced that the child she had had before was not the same child now and therefore he should go into the specialist provision - the class there has non verbal children - the others go into the mainstream. the la wording is very wishy washy re specialist provsion in the mainstream and does not specify that he will even get any 1:1 support so i left in that I wanted full time 1:1 by a HLTA just in case they rule with the LA. however if the accept he needs small class sizes then i will be okay. im hoping that cos hes already been to the school was bullied and removed that the tribunal will not send him back to the school again - if i lose - he isnt going and if needs be we will move.

but yes even on the morning of a tribunal anything can happen hence why i feel still like ive been hit by a train. my professional witnesses were disgusted with the LA behaviour and feel i would have strong grounds to appeal if I lose.

The LA barrister might suggest dropping tribunal if LA reports same as indie ones.

In fact, this might even be a way for them to concede without "giving in to you" iykwim

The NHS people are still professional people they are not going to make anything up or play anything down and even the LEA EP has a professional code they have to keep to be registered to practice.

Mareey - I don't think they will concede. EP reports will not make the same recommedations. The lea EP who saw DS1 is actually a trainee. It might be that one of the reasons for wanting an update is because they need the advice to come from a fully trained EP/his supervisor. Given that our indi SALT is authorised to conduct DISCO I doubt that the reports will be the same as the assessments are only part of the report.

bjk - I know that the provision aspect is in a mess from the lea pov. part 4 names a school that is due to close in July 2013. Tribunal have ruled that the LA needs to name an alternative school within 10 days. There are no schools with units. He is too HF for maintained ss. The danger is that the lea name m/s but actually intend to deliver education elsewhere (like a PRU). I don't want to be in a situation where I have solid arguments why m/s is not suitable but that at tribunal the rug is pulled from under my feet because I have not got soild arguments why PRU/maintained specialist is not suitable because this was not named in the first place.

PRU's/medical schools are not set up for long term placements the point of them is reintegrate after 2 terms usually maximum into mainstream or elsewhere, the tribunal are not going to go with a PRU surely?

Go and see them now (especially the special schools) or at the very least get the ofsted data etc and bung in some freedom of information request about pupil numbers, ages, proportion with SEN / statements etc.

They might invent a unit suddenly. 'Ds will be in New Road pru for 2 terms preparing to re-integrate into our shiny new unit being set up at Oldschool High'.

They just need one classroom, and one staff member. Your won't be the only hfa dc in need of provision, so it'd be a way of spreading out the hlta provision.

DS1s first tutor told me that given his age and having the rest of secondary to go they would try and find placement in a school but she did tell me that there were 14/15 year olds that they cannot place who will remain at the PRU until they are 16.

I've visited the websites of special schools and read ofsted reports but tbh it is obvious that they are not right for DS1. I would feel a fraud wasting their time and mine if I went to visit.

We moved here because they had small middle schools but they are all closing/merging with upper schools at the end of July 2013. LA can't name school about to close but can't name the upper school with which it will merge because they have no year 7 at present and can't accommodate him this academic year. There are some high schools 11-16 but DS1 needs a small school/small clasess - not least because of APD - and these have 1,500+ pupils.

You're not wasting their time (or yours) if you're saving ds from being sent there to waste one of their places on a dc who they any teach.

Aargh. Can't not any