Statutory Assessment

[debs40]

I'm wanting to keep this brief as I'm without dx/OT report etc yet (to follow in two weeks) but do you think this would be enough:

I believe that (child?s name)'s special educational needs are as follows:

DS has complex needs
(i) list sensory problems and effect (e.g. proprioception)
(ii) list coordination problems and effect (e.g. handwriting)
(iii) list social communication problems (e.g. play, going into school, anxiety, mixing with peers)
(iv) problems with working memory/social communication creates a barrier to curriculum despite high IQ - results are av erage

My reasons for believing that the school cannot on their own make the provision required to meet my child?s needs are:
(i) needs 1:1 for OT recommendations - report to follow e.g. writing - report to follow
(ii) requires specialist SALT input - report to follow
(iii)requires 1:1 for sensory issues to enable access to curriculum (e.g. support for lunchtime, school trips, breaks, time out)
(iv) requires 1:1 for social communication e.g. supported play, help with changes to routine, help with going in to the class, consider also social communication issues which affect academic achievement e.g. reading, explanation, use of expressive language
(v)requires 1:1 support for work on independence because social communciation, coordination
(vi) requires assistance to ensure ongoing attendance at school

Sounds good but I would chuck in a few 'as per typicval child meeting trriad of impairments as per autistic spectrum' comments (to clearly signpost area of need), and instead of I believe I find 'The child's SEN are as follows..... The school cannot meet the provision required in the followingareas

We also included a patragraph about what we thought the outcome of refusing to assess would be (harm to another child or himself)

Thanks SMA, helpful as ever!!

SMA, we are without dx though at present re: typical traits but I suppose I can use the fact that he has confirmed ASD traits and is likely to be confirmed as on the spectrum and having a PDD of some sort. DCD is confirmed.

Is it a request to the LA to stat assess? If so it's a bit presumptive pre-assessment to state he needs 1:1 - I think that may make them less inclined to stat assess (expense)

Definitely add what the consequence of refusal to assess will be.

Wet - yes it is a SA request but I presume it will be rejected out of hand in any event irrespective of what I put? Is it not specialist help and 1:1 that schools are not able/prepared to fund so anything else you put, LA will say school can do.

I am assuming that there will be a refusal against which I will have to appeal, by which time I will have reports. I am just wondering whether I should press ahead and do that now in light of the fact that DS heads to the junior dept of the primary in Sept in a class of 36.

I would change the "reasons for believing school cannot provide" bit to a list of how they have failed your ds already (ie, they obv cannot cope, because XYZ has happened - isn't it your ds who couldn't go on a school trip?)

Agree presumptive to tell them what he needs - that is what the SA is supposed to determine.

So what do you put to justify that school cannot meet this out of own provision? Seriously, anything you say like social skills groups or anything but 1:1, LA will say 'school will do', so I'm confused

they might not refuse (especially as your school is already hinting to you tha thye cannot cope)

I got my request for SA granted first time (both times) - it was only after that they started buggerig about.

Good luck Debs - I have just submitted a request for SA too! I didn't state what I think he needed yet but said that after 6 years ds has made minimal progress, been on SA+ for xx years,a wide range of strategies and interventions had been used but his difficulties remained etc...
Have got to now write my views so they consider to assess (will probably be pages). We don't have dx yet either (suspected HFA/Asperger) but are awaiting ADOS test.

If he has confirmed ASD traits debs that's enough; it's also fine yto state youa re expecting to receive an DX of ASD, although they may well as with ds3 name that as 'Social, linguistic and sensory issues' (er anyone got another name for those then? yep.... ASD PMSL)

WRT to 1-1 I would probably phrase it as 'significant support from an appropriate indiovidual'; you are hinting ehavily rather than setting out your stall early. I do think though if you make it plain you know what is needed then you are less likely to be treated as daft ha'porths who would struggle to spell tribunal let alone refer to one.

It's also fine to include some of the issues that you ahve ahd with school in as evidence of their failure to meet needs; we did and we thought we had zero percent chance of being assessed yet we were at first asking. You have to establish why this school cannot at present meet this child's needs: establish away.

didn't your school exclude your ds form a school trip because they couldn't (they thought) cope with him? Proof right there that school cannot meet needs from own provision (apologies if I've got that mauddled up, and it wasn't your ds)

so, along the lines of "I believe school cannot meet needs as ds has already been excluded form school activities due to a need for more staff"

Thanks. The fact is that school cannot meet his needs because they don't understand him and have no willingness to do so but that is not grounds for a statement!

So, I think I need to take the complex needs bit and argue why any school, not just this school can't meet them.

I can see your point about stating 1:1 and I will re-phrase but if this needs to be detailed, I may as well await the reports for ammunition in respect of his needs as unsupported assertions are likely to be disregarded.

The reality is that school don't understand what he needs and cannot supply the level of specialist help he requires e.g. can only supply generic social skills training etc.

silverfrog - yes it was me but I know know how these things go. I can say 'they didn't want to take him on the trip' but they will say 'they were able to accomodate it'.

Is it not right to say he has needs which will require specialist intervention and individual assistance above and beyond what a school budget can offer and that is obvious because of lack of obvious progress over 1 year on SA+ but also because of the narure of his disability? It in itself presents a barrier to the curriculum.

It's dfine to say that but specific examples do help.

'I can see your point about stating 1:1 and I will re-phrase but if this needs to be detailed, I may as well await the reports for ammunition in respect of his needs as unsupported assertions are likely to be disregarded.
'

'DS will require significant support in the classroom to be able to make progress. It is anticipated that this will require somec level of 1-1 support, although we are awaiting additional reports to clarify this and will send them with a more detailed assessment of required provision as soon as they become available'

I think this is probably best done after reports are obtained if this has to be detailed because it will be easier to present a letter arguing that a statutory assessment is necessary because the school cannot provide all the help that DS needs. That seems to me to be the pivitol issue: is it more likely than not that a child with these needs can have them met by school resources. The limited nature of the intervention to date e.g. occasional social skills groups run by TA rather than specialist SALT provision suggests not but that is better argued once a report is obtained and attached.

tbh I would mention that the school have been indicating that they feel a special school will now be appropriate, and have been asking questions of you. This surely indicates that they themselves are unsure of their ability to meet his needs.

I hope you wrote down that particular conversation!?

Star (like the name change btw - mucho grando!) I think you're right. I think, strangely, even though they have been difficult, if I got one report which demonstrated the need for significant support, they'd completely back me.

They just won't do it off their own back and I believe that is to do with the amount of pressure LAs put on schools not to apply for statements and because they don't understand him enough to justify it.

When you send in your letter, the LA will acknowledge it and ask you (and the school) for further information within the six weeks before giving you a decision. So there will be an opportunity to give more detailed information and you'll have the reports by then.

I don't know if it's better tactically to throw in as much information now. I kept my SA initial letter fairly brief but I was turned down, so I'm not sure that's the best thing to do!

I suggest that you look at Ipsea's refusal to assess pack (to pre-empt their refusal) and look how you'd convince a tribunal that SA is necessary. These are:

1 a full assessment is the only way to find out what your child?s difficulties are and what help your child needs;
2 the school could not give all the educational help your child needs unless it receives extra help from the LA;
3 the school has given your child all the help that could be expected but he or she has not made enough progress.

You have covered point 2 but a lot of schools/parents fall down at point 3 because they don't include enough information on what the school has already done and lack of progress (and the school may not be bothered enough to provide that information).

I would also look at your county's own criteria for SA which should be on their website, and what the SEN COP says. The county's criteria can't legally override the COP but it might help to show how you can tick their boxes. Have you looked at the documents here?

Debs, my request focused more on how the strategies put in place had failed.

Also focused a bit on how likely a dx of autism would be.

I can email you what i did, if you feel it might help?

I did the same re strategies that had failed.

I would put in the initial request to the Chief Education Officer at your LEA and keep this letter short and to the point. LEA's do not have the time or even the inclination to wade through a load of stuff from parents in the initial stages.

Better to get the request in now and look at IPSEA's refusal to assess pack so that you are further informed in the likely event the LEA turn you down.

Do not forget too the LEA themselves will write to the various peoples involved only after they agree to assess; they may not actually take much if any notice of anything prior to that.

Has the EP recommended a Statement?. That person's words are very important to this whole process as well.

LOL, I banged on about the discraceful provision so far and the amount of energy it was costing me and my family to make up their shortfall and that ds needs full-time 1:1 and could they let me know the day they make the decision rather than the 2 weeks after so that I could submit my appeal on the day we received formal notice as I don't want to hold up my ds getting his provision, even by that 2 weeks.

It sounds agressive (and it was), but by then I had already fallen out with everyone as ds' needs had been known to them formally for 8 months and he had had NOT ONE form of meaningless intervention, let alone meaningful!

They agreed to a SA, and then statement. However, when I complained about the statement they have stupidly put in writing that the lack of provision in it is because children can access the same resources without one .

Thanks.

The way I understood it was that school are automatically asked to detail what they have been doing after an SA request goes in and that there is no point in telling the LA about the things school haven't been doing but should be because that plays to the argument that school not the LA should be doing the things.

So, yes I will list theoretical help to date and I can list reports (we have not seen EP yet but there is no way she will be saying he needs a statement)but we haven't got several of them which will itemise problem areas more clearly.

The test seems to be - can school meet this child's needs from delegated funding? Part of the assessment should entail a consideration of whether school have been successfully doing so to date and if there is any evidence that they cannot. However, this relies on two assumptions:

(a) school understand the needs which require meeting - which they do not

(b)the needs in and of themselves are such that they form an obstacle to the curriculum which will require help over and above what any school could reasonably be expected to supply for a delegated budget. This is where you need specialist help etc and reports to back this up

However, I do not have access to those at present so the choice is either I wait and present the best possible argument supprted by evidence to request a SA bearing in mind that this is likely to be rejected out of hand in any event for 'policy' matters, or I do a 'skeleton' request sketching out basic areas to be supported by reports at Tribunal after the refusal.

Debs, are school going to say that the help they have put in place has failed and no progress has been made?

Are school prepared to say they do not understand ds's needs?

This is where it gets tricky, you are applying for SA on the understanding that school will back you. Once you have applied, it will become clear as to whether they are or not, as you will get a copy of the school report. Keep your initial request simply, until you know school's response.

You tell the LA about recommendations which are not being followed as these obviously cannot be followed due to lack of resources

SENCO and I have agreed to meet after I receive the reports so we can look at all the recommendations and see if they can reasonably be met through the school. He knows there is going to be a long list and he has said he would support a request on the basis it is beyond their provision.

I would be seeking to supply expert evidence to demonstrate needs which schools cannot meet without significant 1:1, specialist help and to that extent, what school say will not be pivotal. I do not see that schools are particularly best placed to assess needs and confirm whether they are being met when these matters concern neurological developmental disorders which teachers cannot be expected to understand.

Take an argument that a child with a high IQ is underperforming because he is not able to function properly in classroom situation without assistance. School could say 'he understands everything' but they are not the only or even the best judge of needs not being met. I don't actually think they have the ability to make that judgment.

So, bearing in mind that this a long ball game which will result in evidence to a Tribunal, I'm concentrating on those key areas of need (specialist SALT/OT provision/cognitive problems) which will require expert evidence to demonstrate need.

If I can get school onside great. If not, so be it, frankly.