Sort

• 14 Feb 2022

• Yes

  Simple

  Yes. When it comes to drafting an EHCP, the LA must first specify all of the CYP’s needs in section B (COP2015 #9.69(B)), then specify provision in section F “for each and every need specified in section B” (COP2015 #9.69(F)).

  Placement is considered last, and a draft plan (sent for consultation) must not include a name or type of placement (so that the placement decision is made in the light of whatever comes from section F and the consultation response): CFA2014 s38(5).

  This has been the subject of settled case law (albeit mostly in relation to statements under EA1996). See The Learning Trust v MP [2007] EWHC 1634 (Admin) #42: “It is important… to identify or diagnose the need before going on to prescribe the educational provision to which that need gives rise, and only once the educational provision has been identified can one specify the institution or type of institution which is appropriate to provide it.” 

  In that case the FTT had erred in law in deciding on Part 4 (predecessor to EHCP section I) and left it to the parents to “agree some amendments with the LEA to reflect our decision that [P] should be placed in a residential school.” That was “putting the cart before the horse” in that Part 4 (placement) should only have been decided on after any disputes about Part 2 (SEN) and then 3 (SEP) had been resolved (and in the light of what had then been decided). 

  See also: A v Barnet [2003] EWHC 3368 #17, T v Neath Port Talbot [2007] EWHC 3039 

  More: Does Section F have to tie in with Section B?

  

  Noddy 'no-nonsense' Guide
  Authors: David Wolfe QC, Leon Glenister

0 This is helpful

|

Comment

Post