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

You have to prove that progress is not being made with the provision that is already in place. If school are going to say he is making progress, then there is no need for further provision, no matter what the difficulty is iyswim.

No, you don't. That is one but not the only legal test.

Parents guide to SEN COP:

If you feel that your child?s school or early education setting cannot provide all the extra help that your child needs, or your child is not making enough progress and so is falling further behind other children of the same age, you can ask the LA to carry
out a statutory assessment.

This is an 'or' not an 'and'. This is only a guide not the statutory provision but it fits in with SENCOP and makes sense. Clearly, some children have needs above and beyond school resources. An SA is not legally contingent on failure.

Debs, im just second guessing that a child would need extra help to make progress.

My application was rejected because the school were saying ds was making adequate progress with the help he already had (despite having reports stating he needed a high level of 1:1)
I then had to prove that he wasnt making adequate progress.

Still i suppose its about establishing your grounds for appeal, you are going for a different angle and you know the Law etc, ive just fumbled my way through it

I think it makes sense to send off the basic request now and get the clock ticking.

I understand that you don't need to meet both parts of the legal test, but makes a stronger case if you can cover it from both angles - not being able to provide help and not making enough progress. Making progress covers social/communication, behaviour/emotional development and other areas, not just cognitive attainment. But you can deal with that when you're asked for more information and when you have reports.

Claw, I don't have all the answers by far and you are the one with the SA after all!

Sugar - you are right and I'll be addressing the failure of 'generic' SCD provision to ensure progress

Debs, i still cant believe how i got there though. I suspect having a terrible school helped my case!

As Sugar said, i went for both angles. No/limited progress and school would not be able to provide the extra help needed without a statement.

You have lots of legal knowledge, which will really help.

So, should I wait for reports? I'm kind of thinking, it's less than two weeks now, may as well.

If your only angle is going to be extra needs which school cant provide etc, i think you will need reports.

If you have evidence of no/limited progress, recommendations not being followed, school not understanding needs now, go for it. But this involves challenging the school and i doubt they will back it.

I wouldn't. You've waited enough.

Two weeks easily stretches to three or more when you're waiting for things from professionals! And waiting takes you closer to the summer break, which will make things awkward as it is.

The reports are supposed to be handed to us at the diagnostic appointment on the 24th. I suppose I could book an appointment now with SENCO for week after that and get it sent off then. I will be able to go through recommendations with him and see if school are on side.

Just been reading through Debs.

So what do you put to justify that school cannot meet this out of own provision?

That their strategies have failed and no/limited progress has been made, targets not being meet etc. Recommendations not being followed. SA will identify his needs, which wont be able to be met from own provision.

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!

Perfect grounds for a statement, your ds has complex needs and the school are simply unable to identify them or put the correct help in place. They need the guidance of SA.

Perfectly put Claw! I shall use that one!

If you decide to wait for reports, in the meantime apply for a copy of school record whether the school are backing you or not.

Im assuming and second guessing that the LA will turn down your SA for similar reasons to mine, basically ds is making adequate progress.

Your tribunal case will then focus on the grounds your case was rejected and proving them wrong. So the sooner you get your response from LA the better iyswim.

If you are expecting to be turned down, no matter what you write, you might as well apply now and get your teeth into their reasons for refusal.

Good luck whatever you decide.

Are Tribunal cases not a fresh hearing of the issue rather than a challenge of the decision?

Someone asked me this the other day and I wasn't sure.

Oh here you go, IPSEA guide:

The Tribunal stands in the shoes of the LA when it looks at the evidence put before it and decides whether the LA decision followed the law and SEN Code of Practice. It will also make a decision based on what is right for the child at the date of the hearing.

I suppose the key point is that you need to focus on the law and the grounds for applying. The LA often don't and just apply blanket policies for refusal

Tribunal cases are evidence from both sides, both trying to prove themselves right, in order to prove yourself right, you have to prove them wrong. Its both a fresh hearing and a challenge. Well that was my take on it anyhow!

LA refused. I then kept on at them proving the reasons for the refusal was wrong and further evidence for tribunal.

This bit is useful too:

Generally there are three ways of establishing a SA is necessary. By saying that:
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

Debs exactly you either meet the legal criteria or you dont is the bottom line and what a tribunal would decide.

In the meantime, you either play the game with the LA and try to convince them they wont stand a chance at tribunal or sit back and wait 6 months for tribunal.

"in order to prove yourself right, you have to prove them wrong"

I think this is why evidence is so important. I suppose you are best to think of it as presenting your strongest case and letting the evidence speak for itself. What they LA are doing is effectively challenging your evidence e.g. sufficient progress has been made etc, so your evidence has to be good.

What it isn't is a review of the initial decision in the sense of judicial review which is what someone mentioned to me last week .

Exactly again Debs, the thing to bear in mind is that evidence from reports is only evidence that there is a need. You then have to prove that school cant meet this need without the provision/guidance of a statement.

Debs, ive im entirely honest with you, i would not feel comfortable with agreeing with school that progress is being made, which i assume will be happening? School wont be saying there is lack of progress?

What are the consequences of needs not being meet? If ds has managed to make progress without any extra help up to now, why does he need it now kind of thing?

It's the Debs and claw show........

Debs, Claw is right to challenge what you are saying. That is the path to a stronger case. Take heart in two things however. 1) If you have the balls, you'll get a SA by hook or by crook. If you get a SA, you will 'probably' get a statement.

This whole things takes blimin forever, so get the ball rolling and in that time make a lot of contact with a lot of people and get them to say a lot of silly things that you can record so that when the time comes you have plenty of evidence. Don't leave any incident at school un-challenged, and ask lots and lots of questions

The next part however, is the tricky part, and that is where you need to provide evidence for what your ds' needs in his statement. Whilst you DO need to start thinking about this now, and providing evidence where you have it, this needs to be your focus once you have begun your SA journey iyswim, and some of it may even happen after the final statement is issued.

You probably know now what some of that evidence looks like, so you can 'set up' incidences where you can collect it, but you don't need to rush it all in right this second.

It's a long ole road.

Claw, the Tribunal can only decide on evidence, either evidence of need or inability to meet it and the two issues are connected.

What I think I am focusing on is demonstrating is that needs are so significant, complex and various that they cannot be met without a statement and if they are not met he will not make academic progress consistent with ability. On top of this of course, is the need to make progress in other areas such as social communciation etc

There comes a point when evidence of need cannot anyone's definition be met by a school e.g. schools will not employ specialist SALT provision, In this county, there is NO SALT provision at all without a statement. It is all done by TAs on a generic basis. So school are using non-specific programmes to try to keep him included but they are not able to sort the main problem of his inability to make sense of his world. For that, he needs specific input from a highly qualified experienced SALT, who knows how to set appropriate targets, based on his progress, that matches his learning style, etc. Schools cannot do this themselves

So evidence of need can be evidence that a need cannot be met because to meet the need is beyond the specialism or financial capacity of the school. This is why I'm not hanging on school's words/actions for any of this

I will however try and persuade school to agree that there are complex needs here which need identifying before progress can be properly assessed. That is supported by the reports we have received to date and the comunity paediatrician

Right i see where you are coming now Debs, you are doing two steps in one and even doing the LA's job for them!

You are aiming to prove the provision needed before the SA?

Ive left that bit for now, although i will have to add a watch to this thread, for your ideas!

Star, i will quit the show now