Unique provision tailored to the child

[blueShark]

I have heard rumours our LEA might be offering this so called 'child tailored' provision delivered inhouse in the Council I believe, so all OT and SALT delivered directly to the child as well a 1:1 teaching (if not babysitting as I assume noone has control over what/how things are done). This is offered to children for whom there is no provision in the borough and they dont want to fund out of borough provision.

Is this legal? I have heard of a child that possibly had this for over 6 months and then slowly integrated into school when place became available. Couldnt understand the parent better due to a language barrier but I was appaled to hear it exists.

How can the LEA name such placement on a statement?

Why would this be a bad thing? If the provision needed was 1:1 teaching with OT and SALT and the 'child tailored provision' provided 1:1 teaching with OT and SALT...job done.

If it is a stop-gap with inferior provision to that which has been assessed as needed, then that's a different matter.

Where would this take place? For a hard to place child like DS1, I would be concerned that this would not provide the necessary opportunities for social skills building group work. And what about children of secondary age? Would they be provided with tuition by subject specialists?

Unless all other options have failed, including out of borough placements, I can't see that this would be a viable long term solution.

its so 'fantastic' that the child didnt gain anything in the 6+ months, thats my concern and child became more demand avoidant than ever.

I am concerned that this provision shouldnt be a gate for children accessing out of borough provision because it costs more.

Who would oversee does the child really gets speech or OT etc?

That's not necessarily the provision, though, more the quality of it. What I mean is that you can't, unless you are privvy to the details, know if the 1:1 teaching and OT and SALT is by top dog amazing profs with a child who has struggled so much that they needed that 6 months to be able to attend to educational tasks again, or if it is by crappola staff who have no interest in children. Likewise, you can't know if the OOB provision would have achieved better results.

to me it seems more like crappola staff that just looked after him and delivere the general babysitting so that it looks the child is getting some education and coming out of the house. Daily naps and trips to the park is what concerned me.

But is it legal to have this?