Do class TA hours mean statement can't be met?

[KOKOagainandagain]

In the current on-going saga, DS2 was forced to start at the local village primary by the LA even though parents had named another m/s primary in a neighbouring village. Both schools initially said no as they were full to their PAN of 28.

It turns out that the LA preference only employs TAs on part-time contracts during the mornings only. On all afternoons the CT is on their own. During the morning the class TAs are busy delivering literacy and numeracy interventions.

The statement is crap at this stage and very vague but does say that DS2 receive 15 hours support from a LSA in addition to support at break and lunchtimes. The school are interpreting this support as 'access to' but even so a TA is not even in the same room as DS2 for 15 hours a week. Has anybody else encountered this? The head has said he has no intention of altering staffing arrangements and is not giving support during less structured times (assembly, PE etc) or at break or lunchtime and the head has said they will not do so because the level of disruption to other peers or staff is not great enough . He was not happy that I pointed out that this was irrelevant as the statement provided support to enable DS2 to access the curriculum.

I am also not happy of the timing of his out-of-class interventions. None have been set up for him so they have always run at these times. He does gym-trail 3 times a week, one social skills group and one 'lego therapy'. These interventions are delivered after lunch and so on 4 days out of 5 he is missing at least part of lessons (topic, science, creative writing and music). At his old school gym trail (for which he now misses part of 3 lessons) were delivered at the very start of the day before lessons began. When I have questioned the what measurable benefit the interventions would have and whether they were (all, simultaneously) worth missing that amount of teaching time (especially since he is of assessed high ability but underachieving and should also have extension lessons) the CT has said he has to have them to meet the 15 hours!

The statement is still in draft form. I have had to contact SALT and OT as moving from an Essex to a Suffolk school meant that he was not a current patient when the statement was drafted at Suffolk but no advice was sought from Essex, and so the provision he was receiving at SA+ was not put on his statement. Suffolk provision is non-existent and they initially refused transfer of care as he had already received more support than DC receive (termly visits from SALT for the past 3 years and from OT for the past 2 years). Suffolk's full pathway for OT is one school visit followed by discharge. He can't be referred then for 9 months. After much negotiation both SALT and OT have now accepted referral but we have to go right back to the beginning so I will have to finalise without SALT and OT on the statement.

DS2 is now going to be referred to the HFA clinic at GOSH by his GP for a second opinion. For the past year and a half the consultant has been vacillating between ADHD and ASD with each assessment suggesting the other but requiring further assessment. In April her medical evidence was 'highly likely to be on the autistic spectrum' but now her September report says 'possible ADHD'. This just cries out that DS2 is too complex for them to diagnose. I cannot afford to wait and see any longer as the resources Suffolk schools provide for DC with ADHD are different (less) than for DC with ASD.

Sorry it so long - lot on my mind.

If the statement is still in draft then get the wording changed if you can. Get it changed to either 1:1 support or that the TA will work 'directly with DS' or something along those lines where it clearly states that he HAS to have that direct support.
My DS has had full time 1:1 for years and the school have actually hired TA's just to work with him to meet the requirements of his statement. The funding from the statement should cover some of the costs of the school hiring a TA for your son.
Your son doesn't have to have all of the interventions outside of class to meet the 15 hours, surely some of the hours could be, and should be, spent supporting him to do his class work! See if something can be written into the statement to say that x amount of hours will be spent supporting him in the classroom. Although this will need to written very carefully so the school don't interpret it that the TA just has to be in the class.
The less structured times are the times when our kids need the most support ime so the HT is being unfair. It sounds like they are happy to take the funding from the statement as long as it doesn't interrupt the running of their school!

You've clearly got a lot one at the moment but pick one battle at a time. The SALT and OT referrals are done so tick that one off for now.
The ASD/ADHD assessments are in hand. They might not be going smoothly but your in the system so tick that one off as well and at least he will be seen by GOSH which is a good thing!

I'll try dig out DS's statement later and see if i can find some decent sentences that you could put in yours.

I think the out of class interventions have the effect of removing 'certain' children from the class in the pm when there is no TA present. Ie no support in class = no problem because he is not in the class anyway (and neither are the other DC who may require more support than the CT can deliver alone).

I can't decide whether it is worth re-writing the draft. I did this with DS1 using MS's and DK's reports which were specified and quantified. LA totally ignored it and finalised their original draft. I have not got Indi reports yet so I only have the existing EP report which is not specified or quantified. Part of me thinks what is the point? Leave it as it is, finalise and appeal. Can I still appeal if I do this?