go all the way to sendist or be grateful??

[jackofall]

So after a year of hard fighting and a lot of meetings and angry letters we are very lucky to have had the statement part 2 ammended to be accurate and part three to be almost there. The LEA have now also awarded DS a place at the local sen school - which is a lovely school but like most LEA schools lacks onsite therapists. We had DS assessed at a non maintained school locally for three days who have offered him a place. They do have on site therapists etc.
So... do we a) accept the LEA offer or keep fighting and try to get the non maintained place??
it's so hard to know what to do for the best. If i'm honest the thought of more time/effort/money (11k for solicitor to stand a chance of winning) makes me feel totally exhausted, but more importantly are we just accepting something which is "adequate" when we could have something which might be better??

I'd go for therapy. It's made the world of difference to my chap.

Gird your loins and fight on but you HAVE to prove he NEEDS the therapy otherwise they will just alot you the sen school (which isn't the worst case scenario by any means)

Is the non-maintained not private but not state? ie run by a religious organisation say because if it is 'non-maintained' it will be much much cheaper than a private sen school - my son is in non-maintained and although the costs are higher than the sen school they are a mere pin prick compared to somewhere run by the Cambian group.

All the best.

Or fight for external therapists to come into the local SEN school?

What kind of therapists?
If SALT (of which i am one) remember that the Lancashire Judgement (full details on IPSEA website) ruled that communication issues are responsibility of Education Authority and not health Authority, no matter what they tell you.

Thus if need for SALT specified and quantified, they have to provide even if they bring in locums.

Don't have salt (OR OTHER THERAPIES) put under non -educational needs either as in salt case it's illegal and in case of other therapies, decidedly iffy (see smae website for other landmark rulings on this and other issues.)

Hi
To get your child an LEA-funded placement
in the non-maintained school you wold have to prove that the maintained school preferred by the LEA could not meet your child's needs whereas the non-maintained school could. As both could provide SALT, the only difference being that one's therapy was provided off-site and the other's on-site would probably not be a clinching factor in favour of the non-maintained school as long as the therapy was delivered.

It's so important to get the needs adequately described in part 2 so you can fight for adequate provision to be stated in Part 3 - which you probably already know.

Unfortunately if the LEA's solution is 'adequate' i.e. can meet all the provision stated then your child is not entitled to something that 'might be better'.

Best wishes