Ehcp draft

[elliejjtiny]

Ds5 is 10 and in year 6, diagnosed with asd aged 6. He is quite academic, greater depth in maths, reading age of 11, spelling age of 8. He is working at expected levels for half the other subjects and working towards for the rest. Emotional age of 3 and cuts everything including his own hair if given scissors. Only does school work if given 1-1, otherwise he just sits there and stims. He also has pica. Currently he holds the teachers hand at the front of the line when walking to assembly, the dinner hall etc.

His ehcp draft arrived today and he has his 1-1 specified during lessons which is great. However there is no 1-1 specified in between lessons or at lunch/breaktime. Should I be pushing for this? not so much for now but for year 7. The ehcp says his teachers will be made aware that he is a flight risk so he will be looked for quicker than normal if he doesn't turn up with the others. He will also have a social story for how to get to each lesson. I have to admit when I have come in to the secondary school for meetings etc I have noticed the staff have been really good at noticing students wandering about or heading out the door in the wrong direction. Also when my ds4 fell over in between lessons he was found and taken to first aid by a member of staff immediately so clearly there are staff around in between lessons.

If DS needs 1:1 between lessons and/or at lunch/break, then yes, push for it. What do the reports say?

Make sure the 1:1 detailed, specified and quantified in F. It often isn’t, but parents do realise until it isn’t provided and they try to enforce it. When checking F look out for vague and woolly wording - “access to”, “or equivalent”, “opportunities for”, “as appropriate”, “would benefit from”, “regular”, “up to”, “would be useful/helpful”, “such as”, “e.g.”, “etc.”, “as required”, “as advised”, “key adult(s)”, “small group”. If provision isn’t detailed, specified and quantified, the EHCP isn’t worth the paper it is written on and cannot be enforced.

Go through all the reports with highlighters. Highlight all DS’s special educational needs in one colour and all the provision to meet his needs in another colour. Each need should have corresponding provision. There should also be corresponding outcomes.

Then go through the draft and make sure all the highlighted needs are in B and the highlighted provision is in F. Make a note of anything the LA have omitted from the draft, any needs without corresponding provision, any woolly and vague wording, and anything the reports have failed to include.

When you come across vague and woolly wording, check the reports to see if they are woolly and vague or if the LA has watered down provision. Provision in EHCPs is taken from the reports, so if the reports are vague and woolly, the EHCP will be too. If the reports are vague and woolly, ask the LA to go back to the report writer(s) to make the reports detailed, specified and quantified. If the LA has watered down provision, make sure to request the LA sticks to the wording in the reports.

Also make sure any health or social care provision that educates or trains is in F. For example, LAs like to put things like SALT, OT, physio, etc. in G (health care provision) when it belongs in F.

Thank you. Report from primary school details the support that they currently give him, including holding the teachers hand when leaving the classroom. The ed psych in his report said he thought ds could manage to move between lessons as long as he had social stories to show him how to get to all the lessons, peer mentoring, staff on high alert so if he is spotted somewhere where he shouldn't be then he will be seen and brought back quickly.

He doesn't have anything like salt or ot. He is known to the children's autism outreach team but we don't get individual support from them, we just go on their outings sometimes.

I've gone through everything with a highlighter and also asked the sencos at both the primary and secondary school to look through it as well. It seems good but the primary school senco said it was very expensive and the LA haven't said how much money they are going to give the school yet. She did say that he absolutely did need everything on it and that the school would fight the LA if they didn't provide the funding to match the cost of the provision in section F.

Don’t focus on how expensive it is. Focus on F being detailed, specified and quantified.

Did you not request SALT and OT input as part of the EHCNA?

The EP report is poor. It sounds like you will probably have to appeal when you have the finalised version.

Thank you. He doesn't need salt or ot, although we do still use the strategies and visuals that the ot gave us years ago. Everything that we asked for is in F, apart from the 1-1 in between lessons at secondary school. Primary school said that they would carry on giving him 1-1 when the class moves from the classroom to the dining room, on school trips etc, whether it's part of his ehcp or not but I don't know whether the secondary school will.

Make sure the wording is watertight because it is rare for an initial draft to not have some vague and woolly wording. This is important because it can have all the provision you want in there but if it is vague and woolly it isn’t worth the paper it is written on.

It is very unusual for an autistic child with needs significant enough for an EHCP to not require SALT and OT. The scope of their involvement is wider than many realise and from your posts, DS5 would benefit from their input.

Thank you. I have gone through it all with the senco of his current school and the senco of the secondary school. Section F is great although the secondary school senco wanted OT and SALT put in so that has been requested. The main problem is the LA have now said that he is only going to get band 4 funding which is less than a quarter of the money the school needs to do everything in section F. So now the secondary school have told the LA that they won't take DS unless they give them the funding they need for everything in section F.

If the provision is detailed, specified and quantified in F, it must be provided. The LA is ultimately responsible for ensuring it is provided. That includes ensuring there is sufficient funding. So, focus on ensuring the provision being detailed, specified and quantified in F rather than the banding.

Be careful trusting the SENCOs on the wording on F. Lots do not understand SEN law surrounding the wording, and many do not adequately advise parents on the wording/SEP.

The state school cannot say they won’t take DS. They can object when consulted, but they can be named against their will. The LA must name the parental preference unless the LA can prove the high bar to show:
-The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs (“SEN”) of the child or young person; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the provision of efficient education for others; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources.

Thhankyou. The provision in F is definitely detailed, specified and quantified. I'm just going to check the reason the school have for not taking DS.

The school said to the LA the first 2 things on your list. The SENCO talked to dh on the phone and said that they are not rejecting DS and they want him to attend the school, it's just the money issue. I can't say I blame them, they are never going to find someone willing to be a full time 1-1 for less than a quarter of the normal salary.

From your posts, it is unlikely the LA will be able to prove the high bar for either of those. You need to ask exactly what the issues are (and it can’t just be funding). It isn’t enough for them to just give vague reasoning.

Thank you. They have written about 2 paragraphs for each reason. They said that he needs 1-1 all through the day to help him do his work and keep him safe, he needs SALT and OT and he needs a sensory room. They have said they need to employ more staff to do everything that's on the ehcp. They said that the classroom environment is not suitable for his sensory needs unless he has a full time 1-1.

None of the reasons in your post will meet the high threshold in law.

Does that mean he won't get the 1-1 and everything else in section F or will the school be forced to pay for one out of their budget? This school is already the cheapest option for the LA so they can't say that another school can meet his needs with band 4 funding. His current primary school is already doing most of the provision in section F so they will be able to keep struggling on until the end of the year. It's easier in primary school because they mostly stay in one room and there is more supervision at lunch and break.

Provision detailed, specified and quantified in F must be provided and can be enforced via JR if necessary. Ultimately, the LA is responsible for ensuring the provision is provided. That includes ensuring there is appropriate funding.