EHCP section F provision wording help

[rrra]

Hello

I'm in the middle of marking up a draft EHCP that I was sent before Christmas, and need to send it back this weekend. After the draft was sent I've had back private SALT and OT reports in so I've added in all needs, provisions and outcomes from those. I also had to go back to ask for a couple of things to be made more specific.

There are a couple of provisions for equipment and in our area's EHCP format you put provision, frequency and who.

I've got one provision which is 'Child must have access to a consistent keyboard at all times within the school day and to use this for recording when expected to write above 2/3 sentences'. So frequency is 'At all times within the school day'. But I don't have anything to put in who from the report.

Should the EP be specifying someone who is responsible to ensuring my child has this provision, or does the school simply have to provide it regardless as my child must have it?

I'm down into th details now and not sure how important this particular detail is in this case? Amy advice appreciated!

I've also got others like 'Whole staff training in ASD to a minimum of AET level 2 or equivalent, so that all staff understand and accept autistic understanding when planning, delivering and assessing learning'

So that doesn't have a frequency as it is a one off, but who is 'Whole staff of school'. Does it need to be quantified as a frequency or a number of hours per person for the training?

The provision is too vague and woolly.

Start by removing “access to”. With the current wording DD may not be provided with a keyboard at all, and you could not enforce it. Does the type of keyboard matter? I would say it would be the HT and SENCO responsible for ensuring DD had use of a keyboard, but if in primary the class teacher or TA who would oversee day to day.

“Or equivalent” needs removing for the same reason. What the training will consist of needs specifying.

@Imitatingdory

The provision is too vague and woolly.

Start by removing “access to”. With the current wording DD may not be provided with a keyboard at all, and you could not enforce it. Does the type of keyboard matter? I would say it would be the HT and SENCO responsible for ensuring DD had use of a keyboard, but if in primary the class teacher or TA who would oversee day to day.

“Or equivalent” needs removing for the same reason. What the training will consist of needs specifying.

Thank you. Does the 'must have access to' not help? Maybe just must have a keyboard would be better?

Does it need to be written in by the report writer about who should provide this or can the caseworker add this themselves? Because it is an item rather than someone doing something I wasn't sure.

“Access to” is the problem, even if it has limits have beforehand it does not mean DC will definitely get it. It is a common phrase LAs use to make section F woolly. A woolly EHCP isn’t worth the paper it is written on.

Provision in EHCPs is taken from the reports, so if the report is vague and woolly with e.g. “access to” you need to ask the LA to go back to the report writers to make them detailed, specific and quantified.