Help with statment stuff again.

[staryeyed]

WE have gone through the statementing process so far we have rejected the 1st proposed statement and had a meeting with the case worker with the draft of the statement with my amendments. Our school choice was agreed to but they wanted to remove all references to PECS trained people working with Ds. I was told that the case worker had spoken to the head mistress who had confirmed all staff are PECS trained so it was irrelevant anyway. I agreed to contact the school myself and if the staff were all properly PECS trained to have it removed from statement. However it seems although they have a PECS coordinator they are given in house training only and I am currently trying to find out from the school if the coordinator is trained to train because it sounds as if the school is not using it correctly - I spoke to a class teacher who said they use it for snack time[sigh]. I have left several messages since last Friday with headmistress who has not got back to me I keep being told she is busy.

I had also requested that the Occupational therapist write more specific input recommendations but they have also come back quite vague. The SALT has quantified input but says " up to" which I requested they removed. I will contact the OT but I am hitting a brick wall in terms of getting the statement to be specific and quantitative. The professionals writing the report say they are not responsible for quantifying input and the LEA say that they can only include what the professional have written.

So my questions are :

1. Even though DS is going to a special school can I insist that staff are properly PECS trained? (the case worker said that its not for the LEA to dictate how the school spend their budget or train their staff).

2. is there anything I can quote at OT to get them to write more specific recommendations?

That is also my experience starlightMckensie. Everyone acts suprised that Im being so difficult, like why wont I accpet that he will get help and be grateful. I cant count how many times they have said "we only working in the best interests of Ds1" . One of the workers from the pre school intervention team said that the other parents she works with accept vague meaningless things on their statements and asked why I didnt too. I think many of them dont know to question things. AS for independent advice. It doesnt exist unless you go looking.

All so so so true ladies.

Another gem is 'We all have X's best interests at heart.'

Oh really? In that case, why is noone doing anything about a system that is so ineffectual and amateur that it is shameful?

SM, maybe some of these children are being educated outside of your LEA? That is the route we had to take because local provision was unsuitable.

We were told we wanted a 'rolls royce education' (because we wanted twice weekly SALT and weren't willing to accept one visit a term) and she has this now at her new school.

I've heard it as well. Wandsworth council accused one of its residents of wanting a "Rolls royce service" for her child.

They talk about it in the book I linked to in another post. (Although as American, it compares a Cadillac to a Chevy.I keep on getting confused about which is the best though!)
I think it comes from legal responsibility to provide an adequate/appropriate education and not necessarily the best. In which case, the onus on you is to prove that what is on offer in both inadequate and inappropriate.

"cyber We're in contact with RGO. Not used her yet.Would you recommend?"

Yes definitely very experienced and reliable. The approach is not pure VB/ABA - but she can explain it better than me !

I have to wait on the decision made by panel and take it from there. I wont know until Wednesday. I meanwhile I am trying to sort out the other parts of the statment. I have since talked to the LEA officer, The OTs manager and tried to sort this part out. The more questions I ask the more defensive they become.

This was the suggested phrasing on Ds1 statement that the LEA offered how do I change it to reflect properly PECS trained staff either through the course or by a supervisor:

"An environment where ** has access to his PECS book and staff trained in PECS throughout the day, and visual support to prevent him becoming confused/distressed and isolated."

'all staff will have received basic 2 day PECS training (in the last 5 years).'

They have agreed to name the school we want on the statement. However, they are still arguing about the PECS training part. I have not seen the finalised statement but it should be sent soon.

I'd stand my ground.If they don't have PECS training, they can;t meet his needs.Simple as that.

This is the finaliosed statement. I spoje to them and said that I wanted the PECS training to be in there buut they said that it had already been decided by panel and there was nothing they could do.

threaten them with tribunal see how they aswer then .I found muttering that and ipsea to them in meeting as got what i wanted

I did say I would take it to tribunal. I kept getting same answer "nothing they could do as it hadnt been allowed. I think the managers make the decisions in panel. I have to see how it is phrased in the final statement so that I can argue with it. I think it will say someting along the lines of "PECS trained". which I, at no point, agreed with. I may take the final statement to some SN legal people to check. Ditto for OT provision. I have no idea how they have phrased that one either. At every point thay have tried to make every provision vague and meaningless and I believe there is an under current of deception, manipulation and conspiracy (without meaning to sound paranoid) confirmed by the fact that a person called me yesterday to discuss finer points of statement who is not an LEA officer but works for DS's pre-school team .