occupational therapy provision in statement

[sphil]

I'm writing down our revisions to DS2's proposed statement for a meeting with the LEA on Thursday. Basically very little has been quantified. Does anyone have any advice about how much occupational therapy it's realistic to ask for per term? Atm the paragraph reads:

'Motor skills and sensory integration development work devised and monitored with the specialist advice and input of the occupational therapy service and delivered by teaching and/or support staff.'

I want to add something like 'a minimum of 5 specialist inputs per term' (which is what our revised SLT paragraph says). But I've plucked this figure out of the air - have no idea what is normal, if such a thing exists! How much OT do your children get at special school? How much is feasible, given the current restrictions on the service?
Need help here...

Hi Sphil
My proposed statement for DS2 just said a block of OT input from local PCT to address his motor needs, advise the school and home on the implementation of a motor skills programme and provide input into IEP and annual review

When we went back to the LEA, we asked for clarification on what that would mean, after much discussions the OT dept advised the following:-
a block of therapy will comprise of 6 weekly sessions over half a term. Each session to last 30-40 minutes depending on DS2 concentration on the day. At the end of each block the therapist will review the progress made and make recommendations for the future provision. This was added to the final statement.

I would have prefered not to have the further provision left in the hands of the OT deptment, but I had no option other than to get recommendations from a private OT and go to tribunal.

Mind you we have had the statement since September and have not yet had any OT due to local staff shortages
Have been promised that it will start in January. I am hopeful but we have been trying to get OT for two years now.
Hope this is of some help

Thanks - I think that will be the problem here too. The OT we were seeing went back to Australia in July and they haven't replaced her yet. She wrote an excellent report for the statement before sheleft but didn't recommend an amount of provision, unfortunately. I would have thought DS2 would need at least weekly OT and more than that for sensory integration - daily? Is your DS at special school?

Any other experiences or advice welcome - I only have until Wed eve to get his done! (No pressure... and I do know you all have Xmas cards to write

No not in special school, he is in a mainstream primary.

sphil

If it hasn't been quantified its not worth the paper its been written on. It won't happen without much discussion from you.

Which part of the proposed statement has this been written in?. That can also have a bearing.

Would certainly suggest you contact IPSEA as a matter of course and talk this through with them. They can tell you what to say to the LEA. Would suggest you read them parts 2 and 3 to them verbatim. IPSEA's web address is www.ipsea.org.uk.

Which section is it in? Hard to get it into parts 2 and 3, so therefore hard to make it enforceable (easier to get SALT into 2 and 3)

also depends on the school, I fussed about the statement and OT when ds1 was in mainstream, but since going into special I haven't - because I know he's getting the type of sensoy input he needs now (and more than really- his provision is much better now than it was when it was on the statement but he was in ms).

The issue I find with the special schools is because all the teachers and assistants are trained (and they may sometimes be quite well trained) by salt and OT, the theory is that therapy is integrated into classes rather than separate sessions as in mainstream. DD1's IEP is largely about SALT and OT stuff and I have seen them work on it in class even though she sees SALT/OT no more than twice a term. I suspect that is what your paragraph is about & I can see how this could allow the school to maintain therapy while spreading resources further. However, your problem is that you can't measure the quality/quantity of provision if it is delivered like that, because it may be useless or barely happen at all. I'd be interested to see what IPSEA has to say about that para.

Spoke to IPSEA when we first got the statement through and they were of the opinion that everything should be quantified. However, they didn't tell me how much OT we should/could expect - I guess only someone who knows the child can do that. I've managed to suggest quantities for SLT because our therapist has written in her report that DS2 should have 'a minimum of 5 specialist inputs per term'. My problem is that I don't KNOW how much OT he should have! Don't want to write something totally unrealistic but at same time think it needs to be quantified . Both SLT and OT are in part 3, which I know is good.

Most people who've read statement (including IPSEA) say it reads like a statement for special school - and if that's the case then I think we can relax a bit, as JJ and R3DH3D

My chap is at a special school which we specifically chose because of the onsite OT and SALT. the OT needs were extensively outlined in part 2 and then in part 3 we put in what the school had recommended from his trial there which was one one to one session per week delivered by a qualified Occupational Therapist and other group therapy sessions as needed via assessment by the school Occupational Therapist. It is worth quantifying it because if the school's OT leaves and they don't replace him/her then if the provision is in the statement it still has to be provided. Also if it is an LEA special school - many of the LEAs are now taking SALT and OT out of their schools now. Can you get the OT at your child's school to actually propose the amount needed. Once this is written down then the LEA will have less of a case and you can always go to tribunal. Its worth fighting for though. After only one term I can see the difference in my chap.
Good Luck.