Need some data extraction help for a friend (long...)

[uggerthebugger]

DS2 is in Y6. He's at an indie SS right now in the south of England, and he'll be going to the school's secondary arm in September. Statement all nailed down, sorted, had to fight off some sustained LA fuckwittage, but it's in the bag.

DS2's best friend however is in deep shit. He's at the same indie SS, as a residential pupil. He lives in the same London borough LA as we used to. This LA's SEN team are straight from central casting - reflexively unlawful, bullying, unaccountable, card-carrying disgraces to the human race.

Unsurprisingly, this LA are refusing to fund the kid's indie SS placement for secondary. So this LA is running with two alternatives. Their Plan A is a local mainstream/unit placement that cannot possibly meet his full range of needs. They know this, they know the family knows this, but are trying their luck.

Plan B is a maintained special school - out of borough, but is located in an LA to the north of London with a well-deserved reputation for skulduggery. I know from painful personal experience that Plan B is a fucking terrible school. On paper, it could meet his needs. In practice, it's a three-ring clusterfuck of a provision, and it will grind this kid into dust. He would need transport arranged, two 30-mile trips per day.

There's a good chance that this kid's LA will plump for Plan B at the last minute. The only way that his parents can see off Plan B will be to demonstrate that the indie SS provision is cheaper. The parents are willing to take on transport & residential costs for the indie SS placement, if necessary, to keep costs down.

So for this case, everything is likely to hinge on the parents being able to get accurate, verifiable cost breakdowns for a) transport to the Plan B school from the home LA; and b) the 'recoupment' charge that the second LA will levy on the first LA for the out of borough Plan B placement.

Getting these figures for transport won't be a problem, with persistence. OTOH, getting the agreed recoupment charge figure will be a complete and utter nightmare.

This is what the 2013 regs say:

(3) Where provision for any education to which this regulation applies is made by a providing authority in England in respect of a person who belongs to the area of a home authority in England, the home authority may pay to the providing authority such amount as the authorities may agree.

That looks to me like perfect conditions for a complete and utter fucking stitch-up.

So if you're still reading, I've got two questions:

• How in the name of Hades will the parents be able to get proof of the agreed recoupment charge prior to their (inevitable) Tribunal hearing?

• Does last year's Haining v Warrington judgement override things? Will both LAs now have to provide details of all costs (which will definitely exceed the recoupment charge), or can they just submit the recoupment charge and lean back with a smug fucking grin on their faces?

They can apply to the tribunal on request for changes form as soon as they submit appeal for a direction the LA disclose the costs with a firm deadline for providing info

They can FOI the paying and receiving LA and see if the two figures match up

They can check LA accounts on their websites (any payment over £500 has to be registered) - if lots of LAs send children to this school they may be able to collect info from different LA websites about the costs of travel / recoupment etc

They could ask the paying LA to calculate the provision in EHCP as a personal budget

Would the 30 mile trip not be over the reasonable travel time given the traffic problems in that part of the world?

I would not have thought cost was not the only chance of winning - it would seem unusual to switch from residential to day pupil at that stage - usually thats when children switch the other way. Surely they can run the need for 24 hour curriculum argument as well as a cost argument?

Also social / inclusion in community argument - what peer group / community involvement would have in his local area if is being educated 30 miles away and stuck on the M25 day and night? Would have more of a community / access to leisure etc at residential

Does the Plan B school def have places avail for Sept? Or will it still have by the time the appeal is heard which sounds like it will be late in the day for Sept? Has the LA got anything in writing from Plan B school to say it is suitable will take child and has a place???

Cheers Agnes, loads for me to send them... some answers below..

Travel time - panel-dependent issue. It's over 75 minutes on a bad day. Most days, it would be just over an hour. LA & Plan B school say 50 minutes, which would be true if the school day started at 11 & finished at 2...

They are still on the statement path.

The resi vs day placement has a complicated back-story. Can't explain more here, but the home LA are not currently funding it, and the family could not conclusively prove to a judge that a local primary mainstream / unit placement could not meet his needs.

Nature of disability makes it very hard to argue for 24 hour curriculum, but peer group argument should matter a lot - in theory. Again, panel-dependent, and a panel who look at inclusion narrowly might be inclined against the indie SS.

Plan B school will be able to conjure up place at short notice. Roll has fallen by a third in 5 years, mostly due to the, er, interesting attitude the host LA has to offering statutory provision to its own kids. The LA wants to keep the Plan B school going though as a hedge against locals seeking OOC placements - about 40% of kids on roll come from other LAs.

Amazingly, this family does not yet have a final amended statement. They don't have the wherewithal to get some legal butt-kicking going, just some ineffectual help from a charity. They are starting to fall to pieces.

Ugger - know I owe you a pm - gathering thoughts!

Re: journey time. When my la tried to claim the journey to their school was less time then it really was, I gathered evidence. I daily did screen shots if the route from my iphone/google maps during the school rush hour (both ends of the day). Google does live journey times so it takes into account real traffic problems. Screenshots will also show date/time so you can prove it's been done during school rush hour. If your friend does them for say 2 to 3 weeks, then it'll provide concrete evidence that the la is lying about journey time.

On the transport, watch that they don't bundle child onto existing route thus being able to zero cost. We had that too. But the panel told the la off about that as my dc couldn't be bundled onto same transport because of his anxiety and he'd need an escort. Don't forget to add cost of escort in - although as the child would be y7 they may argue he's too old for one (unless disability includes anxiety or anything that makes him a danger?) if you can inc an escort, make sure it covers the full journey time - my la tried to narrow it right down and not use real journey times so it looked as if they were not paying the minimum wage.

Any more evidence why plan b school has a falling roll? Can you do any digging around that? Can it support the particular sen?

Also peer group and friendship groups? Can you argue that no other child would be going from existing indie school?

Other than that, Agnes has some excellent points.

One other thing to consider is that some m/s (or free) ss don't allow the DC to even visit never mind do trial days. The views of DC need to be taken into account especially at secondary age. Would he attend? Would change of placement risk his being out of school? As far as LAs are concerned financially, budgets for OOC, Indi and EOTAS are too high. Financial potential savings would be lost in a transfer from present placement to any cheaper provision if there was a risk that placement would fail.

I got financial evidence through DP request to LA courtesy of their emails to the transport dept.

cheers TOWIE & keep !

I'll suggest that approach on the journey time... I know someone who clamped one of those time-stamped cycle cams to the dashboard and did the journey each day for a week. The five DVDs they sent in their evidence pack must have been the most boring thing the panel had ever come across

The LA did have a route already in place for this school... but they don't any more. They'll have to set it up again, so there should be a financial trail to follow for the last time this route was active.

Plan B school is set up to support this kid's most prominent SEN. Looks great on paper, but - unlike indie SS - it cannot stretch able kids without diluting provision, and this kid is able. Again, this (plus the absence of a cognitively able peer group) should make a difference - but IME, this is yet another panel-dependent issue.

Falling roll is down to a shortage of local attendees. No shortage of local kids who could benefit from a place there, but this LA has its own way of doing business.

The LA is well aware of the kid's views -on paper and DVD as part of the AR, and also in person. The kid wants to stay at the indie SS. The LA don't give a fuck.

about 40% of kids on roll come from other LAs.
Those other LAs will be able to show what they paid for recoupment charge over the last couple of years, and may even say if they have been notified of any upcoming increases.

If you ask the LAs that are OOC to the Plan B school they will be less likely to massage the info as they won't know why you are asking.

Good plan senvet, there are at least 4 LAs that can be approached this way, so the parents' LA will find it hard to fudge the recoupment cost.

What would be perfect though is to be able to use the Haining judgement to force these LAs to cough up the full cost of the Plan B placement, not just the recoupment cost.

The full figure for Plan B would include the SALT bought in from the NHS, the use of facilities & staff from a neighbouring school, and some other specialist staff on retainer. In previous years, the recoupment cost has fallen a fair way short of the cost-per-pupil figure on the DfE website, so there should still be a significant differential now.

If anyone has any experience with the Haining judgement in cases like this, please holler!

Went for an foi or order - can't recall which on the Plan B school to disclose the costs of each of the staff that were needed and specifically covered
a) cost if they were external ie what they put on an invoice, admin eg CRB (as it was) insurance etc etc
b) costs if they were internal including salary, and on costs such as NI, Pensions, admin etc

It cam back a bit fudged, but on the internal staff we got away from what they were paid divided up by the hour....

Also, the question on the journey is also about the dc. If this dc doesn't find it comfortable for some sn related reason that will be relevant - so one camera on the road and one on the dc if the dc is distressed/uncomfortable etc.

I should say that getting waking day is tough. Looking at the stats from the tribunal I would bet that the 16% where LAs won were large part residential.

Whatever you do, don't rely on "consistency". There is a huge batch of cases where arguing consistency falls flat on its face. Of course it is a part of it, but if you can bring anything else to bear, it will help.

Re legal butt-kicking - I've heard that SOS SEN will do a pre-action letter for parents - maybe refer your friend to them?

As I understand it, the journey time limits is about what would be considered too stressful and would impact on the dc ability to take part in school. 75 minutes is considered the maximum for NT kids. If the dc has an SEN which makes travel stressful for him then a much shorter journey may be appropriate.