Can LEA name an unopened free school or unit attached to MS in Final Statement

[blueShark]

the title says it all, there are lots of free schools and units attached to state MS schools being planned from Sept 2014 and the current thinking of LEA is DS should go there?

But can they name a school that is un opened even though we have proposed a school that meets his needs?

They obviously can't name it on its own, but they could legally say X School until July 2014, new free school from September 2014. However, it's probably risky for them because if you take it to tribunal all they can say that it looks OK on paper - they can't tell the tribunal that it's actually working, what the peer group will be like etc, and you can make a song and dance about the fact that in essence your child will be a guinea pig.

It's also potentially quite hypocritical. I've heard of new independent special schools struggling to get going because LAs refuse to name them because they say they don't know enough about them.

thanks nennypops just what I wanted to hear :)

in fact they are suggesting DS should go to old school as he is still on roll but SENCO confirmed in writing and in meeting they cant meets needs even with FT 1:1.

It would also be worth checking out the school/unit the LA proposes to make sure that it has all the right accreditations, planning permission etc. It's a bit of a long shot, but I heard the other day about a case where the LA wanted to name a new sixth form attached to a special school that was opening. The only trouble was that apparently there are all sorts of regulations and procedures they were supposed to go through and they'd missed most of them, so the new unit wasn't even legal. The tribunal apparently described the LA as totally incompetent.

my area now opening a free special school probably in the sept my son is due to go to secondary - hes currently out at an independent asd school. the people running the free school have been in talks with the LA and been shown a list of children who they would move if the school opened. he then told another parent that all out of county kids would go to his new school. our parents forum challenged him over this and he rebutted that he had said that as clearly LA cant just change part 4 without good reason. from what he said the school wont meet my sons needs but I anticipate that the LA will try it on and name it but when they issue the statement in the February the school will not be open. they will argue that he runs an already successful special school - the same school that turned my son down for a place last year. I also asked him about SALT and OT provision which is one of the reasons my son is in independent school and he said there would be no in house provision.

I'm watching this thread with interest, btw. One of the proposals our LA has for DS1 is a unit that doesn't exist, yet. I have no information about it, at all, other than that they're planning it.

Beware of promises that might never materialise.
It was suggested to us that we looked at an ASD 'base' in a local secondary school. It was abandoned! No staff at all and when we asked where the dc's were we were told that they spent most of their time in the ms part of school .
We were told that they would advertise for a trained teacher and LSA's if we agreed to send ds there but we weren't convinced. Have now seen recently that the same school has been trying to recruit inexperienced unpaid 'volunteers' to support children with SEN and the base is still empty.

SOSSEN caution to be wary of "promises", too. Unless something is already in place and working, how can they, or I, say that it would be a suitable environment for my DS. I can think of lots of ways in which even a good unit would fail him, never mind a still theoretical one.