We lost

[NoHaudinMaWheest]

We had a tribunal hearing for refusal to assess at the end of January. Written decision is now in. We lost.
Tribunal agreed with LA that her needs were well known to the school and as support in place there was no need to assess.

This is in spite of the fact that the support that is in place is only there because the school applied for top-up funding as her needs were greater than could be met from school's own resources. LA granted this so surely that meets criterion for needs 'greater than and additional too'.

She is actually well enough supported at the moment but because it is non-statutory it is insecure. What happens when LA budget is squeezed (as it will be)? When school has a new principal (they are interviewing at the moment)? When she moves school (as she will in a year and a half as no 6th form at current school)?

I am unsure whether to think about appealing or just wait and see if any of these problems do arise.

My LA wants to break any notion of a link to the amount of funding (so called trigger amount) and an ECHP and argue that parents only want to make the provision statutory because they have been let down by school. Provision 'shouldn't' have to be spelled out in a statutory document. At the same time as ECHP the LA have also introduced something called School Plus which is intended to band top-up funding for DC in the m/s. Thus, it is not necessary for DC to have an ECHP to access support up to and including everything (or to have statutory rights because schools/teachers can be trusted). There does seem from posts on here that it has become more common-place for an LA to refuse SA but then want an EP assessment (my LA believed parents were applying for SA but all they really wanted was for the EP to see their DC), and to go all the way to hearing for refusal to assess and for NIL.

Geographical variations clearly show the problems. At SA+ DS2 was receiving support from SLCN, SALT and OT that used to require a statement in his old LA. But since he has moved schools to a neighbouring LA, he has lost that support because it was locally/geographically based and this county does things differently. Even though he now has a statement, I am forced to accept less SALT and OT support than he had before he was statemented or get provision written into the statement that is different from local custom (assess and discharge, wait 9 months and then re-refer). This means appealing to tribunal. If his old LA had written it all down in a statutory document in the first place, he would not have lost his provision as it would be unaffected by different working practices in different areas/schools/classes.

Also, I am not the only parent to be refused named m/s placement because the school is up to its PAN with no right of admissions appeal but only right of appeal to SENDIST. All the schools in my area have identical Local Offers and all 'do' everything equally well and so, parental preference, which assumes difference, is seen to be misguided and irrelevant 'these days'.

'From a purely Machiavellian viewpoint, having an upper tier appeal pending will probably assist in keeping the provision going.'

This ^

But goodness it's all exhausting. Try and keep the emotions in check and keep yourself well.

Agnes 6000 is the amount allocated in our LA. Anything extra has to be applied for as top up funding but I haven't seen anything to limit how much that top up funding can be.

The LA's argument is that 'it is simply unnecessary' to issue a statement or ECHP. But that means that the provision is at the whim of the LA surely. Also I don't understand whether the different levels of provision which schools happen to already have should alter the need for a statement. In dd's case the school she goes to happens to have a unit for physically disabled students which means that the physical access is very good and not additional provision has had to be made. At a different school this might not be the case but her needs for access would remain the same.
In other words is a statement/ECHP essentially about the child's needs or the school's provision/ resources?

You can PM me re Upper tier