Meeting with LA to discuss proposed

[KOKOagainandagain]

Have a meeting next week with DS2's case worker and senior person who I know from previous contact deals with tribunal cases and placement in LA new HFA free school.

My expectations are low. This was desperate delaying tactics as the end of the SA process coincided with my mother dying. Atm DS2 has no school place for sept as we are moving at the end of the month.

My brain is not working so any advice gratefully received. The proposed is less hours 1:1 than he had on SA+ and salt and OT has been omitted even though he is visited in school termly, has devised interventions delivered by TA but monitored by salt and OT.

He never had support at breaktimes but statement says he should - this takes up the entire allotted support time leaving no time for any other support at all during the rest of the school day.

The LA EP report reads very different and highlights vulnerability and need for environmental modification.

How would you approach this?

The meeting was attended by the case worker and her boss. The case worker barely spoke (at the end the senior person joked how the case worker was supposed to have done the talking).

The senior person also said that even though their free ss is in county they have to treat it as if it is out of county because it costs more -ie placement requires tribunal but it is also first choice - ie only offered at hearing when parents want Indi ss as a cheap last resort. It appears that the criteria for OOC Indi ss and for maintained ss are the same. This makes no financial sense at all. I don't think that financial issues should be given priority - this madness is what logically ensues.

And our DC are failed when it really counts. This is not the way it is meant to be

Can the LA now finalise the proposed or is the 15 day deadline to respond to the draft and name part 4 reset by the meeting? TIA ()

Bumping for you Keep as I don't know the answer but I know that you need one. I've not got to your situation yet but all too aware of the imminent 'games' I may be playing with my LA as I wait for decisions on DD and DS's SA.

I am feeling panicky and ds2 is becoming increasingly anxious about not knowing where he will be in sept. Admissions told DH that for a statemented child it didn't matter that the class was full but were waiting for the nod from SEN. Now this. They want us to panic and take their preference because DS2 will start here in sept - how? We have not applied through admissions due to house move or intend to make it parental preference. Their is threat to place him in their own preference in sept and force me to tribunal for another m/s primary a mile away.

I could understand (more) if their preference said yes. I don't understand why they are willing to force the school we don't want to take him but not the school that we do want.

What if I stick to my guns, substantially amend parts 2 and 3 and name preference despite what was said in the meeting?

Basically do they have a strong case or are they likely to fold?

I know they don't want him . It's just about the least worse holding pen until I get to tribunal.

Gosh you really are stuck between a rock and a hard place

Tbh, bearing in mind everything else that's going on (dissertation) and your time limits for that, along with nothing in place for September and knowing you can't home ed because of dissertation, I would be tempted to take their school. Push as much as you can for amendments to part 2 and part 3. But take their part 4

When it all falls apart in a year or so's time, then go back all guns blazing and get the right provision/school through Tribunal.

It is an awful game, but as you've so often pointed out, it's documented failure that makes tribunals act and choose appropriate provision.

At this point, you poor DS hasn't "failed enough" (iykwim) for a tribunal to act properly. So if you fight now, you might end up with a child out of school and still not get proper school/provision at tribunal and won't get your dissertation done.

In a year's time everything might be clearer for you, and your son will be old enough for tribunal to consider longer term future (ie secondary placement).

Thank you for your timely post TOWIE. I have just spoken to IPSEA. I am doomed . LA can legally finalise naming their preference because of the meeting even though their reason for not naming parental preference is not lawful because LAs commonly flout the law until tribunal and I would have no choice but to go to tribunal. Meanwhile DS2 would start in LA choice. I would most likely win tribunal (now) but hearing would not be until the spring and winning would mean an extra transition and so not in his interests and so I might lose. Other option is to request a further meeting with more senior bod and quote the law at them and make clear an intention to go to tribunal. They have a history of conceding with DS1 and DS2 and might do so again.

But what you say is true TOWIE. I forgot about the evidence of failure thing . I know this is logical (I hate my own advice at times) but emotionally I want to save him from the experience. So much damage has been done to him this year and I feel that this has all been to get a statement. Not only has the experience been crap but he has ended up with less provision.

So, eyes on the prize, concede part 4 and focus on 2 and 3 for now.

It may make no difference but have you contacted your MP about the LA doing something unlawful?

Sorry you have to go through this.

I have had to concede part 4 (ms primary) and focus on parts 2 and 3. the LA ended up tying themselves in knots really as the provision that dd needed to remain in ms is very intense - full time TA 1:1, specialist teaching, weekly ot, weekly slt, training for CT, TA and senco from specialist teacher, social skills lessons overseen by slt, whole curriculum tailored to her needs by specialist teacher, at times 2:1 teaching with both TA and specialist teacher. My legal team told me that aslong as this was specified within parts 2 and 3 then ms could stand a chance of working. we have already had one send hearing that has secured the specialist teaching and full time TA plus social skills, training for staff, monthly TAC meetings, yearly review from EP etc. we have another hearing in sept for tge therapies as the LA wont concede them due to the cost -their reasons in a letter to my solicitor!
my solicitor has said to give it 6 months to a year and if dd continues to fall apart we will request an indie placement following annual review, as by this point we will have the evidence that ms doesnt work even with the highest level of support available.

So sorry to hear all your sad news Keep :(. Would it be possible to leave the statement as it is for now, concentrate on getting a school place and looking after yourself. If the statement is not working you can ask for it to be reviewed when you feel stronger or ask for changes at the annual review?

It's horrible seeing DC suffering. However, if the m/s doesn't work and you have to look at s/s in a year's time, then most ss are very experienced at picking at the pieces.

My DS was in a right state by the time he got to his ss this time last year (and so was I!). But they've picked him up, dusted him down and done wonders for him. So much so that at AR they were able to prove that their school is the correct setting for him because he's finally able to make progress - all because of part 2 and part 3 being totally quantified and specified and the school operating a holistic approach.

Although I haven't had the Statement back after AR (after all, the meeting was only 2 months ago!!!) it would take a very brave stupid LA to attempt to move him because we know have strong evidence of failure in m/s and home ed, but evidence that only with all the provision and the school is he finally able to make progress.

If you go with letting them get away with part 4, then at least he'll have somewhere to start in September. And you can concentrate getting parts 2 and 3 sorted out without the expense of any indie reports. And then, if it fails, go in all guns blazing in a year's time or at secondary transition.

As an aside, my LA is now visibly terrified of me, and are actually rolling over and being totally & utterly reasonable and civilised to me whenever they have any contact with me. Shame it took the LGO upholding my complaint to make them act as decent human-beings.

Billie - I would have had the same route with DS1 except for failure of secondary transition. There is no greater evidence of inability to access the curriculum than the inability to be present. Straight from no statement to crap proposed/final to occ Indi ss in two terms.

If I could find somewhere that I thought was right for him I wouldn't feel so bad. DS1 is in an OOC Indi ss because in addition to ASD (as) he is also dyslexic etc. but these schools started for SpLD and don't really get complex presentations - they can deal with severe dyslexia or AS but ime they are not so hot with the ASD.

DS2 has HFA and DME. He doesn't have SpLD.

TOWIE - SpLD interventions have not enabled DS1 to make progress. They just don't work for him. On the other hand, the upside is art. For this reason I made my choice. he better be an artist and keep me in my old age I could be his agent - I can bullshit with the best of them - this work draws upon postmodern existential angst in late modernity and is a good example of the nuerodiversity movement and a timely critique of the notion of inclusion - note the figure has no eyes (ASD) and a very long tongue (dyslexia). This was produced by a 'special' child. Arrrh.

Was - I would love to think that it was ok to take some time and look after myself but in reality it's not. The school and la have already used my mothers hospital admission, death, funeral, executor duties as an opportunity to screw me over. Eg. Ds2 has not had an IEP review since October last year.

If I were cynical, I might think the LA were afraid of trusting the overburdened m/s (with a past history of standing up to the LA & lots of experience) to toe the line.

They don't need your agreement to name the wrong school, nor to issue an inadequate part 2/3. So why agree to something you're not happy with- register your disagreement, but say one way or another you expect DS to be in full-time schooling on 2nd Sept, or you'll be making a disability discrimination claim.

The one advantage of dragging this out with more meetings is if the consequent delay in issuing the final statement helps with your PhD. But the LA have the right to impose a useless statement in an unsuitable school, if they see fit. And you have the right to see them at Tribunal in Feb 2015.