ETW appeal – placement named in the IDP – How to write a case statement and evidence that the environment is not suitable for the child.
A child in Wales with ALN, has been permanently excluded twice from mainstream secondary schools and now has a LA-maintained IDP. The parent wants to appeal the school named in the IDP. The concern is not about the school’s ability to deliver the ALP, but that the environment is unsuitable due to the child’s extreme anxiety and past negative experiences with pupils who attend the school named. The child refuses to visit the school or even enter certain towns where the child may see these individuals, and the parent fears this will prevent the child from accessing education and may pose a safety risk.
How can the parent reflect this clearly in their case statement, and what evidence can they provide to support the appeal, especially given that the child will not visit the school and this is purely based on the child's feelings?
SNAP Cymru
Welsh charity
02 Oct 2025
A: SenseCheck
- 0 Yes
- 0 No
- 2 Other
- 10 Oct 2025
-
Other
|
Other
Can't answer yes or no.:
I thoroughly endorse Sean’s excellent and comprehensive response. There is a duty to take into account the views wishes and feelings of children and their parents under s. 6 ALNET. There also remains an obligation to have regard to the principle pupils should be educated in accordance with their parents wishes so far as this is compatible with efficient instruction and training and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure under s.9 of the Education Act 1996. However recent Upper Tribunal authority indicates that the main focus is on the tests in s. 14(6) or 48(4) of ALNET and the focus is on whether the school can make the Additional Learning Provision required: X v Cardiff Council [2025] UKUT 68 (AAC).
The English case of St Helens BC v TE [2018] UKUT 278 may provide some useful guidance, but it must be considered in light of the differences between the Welsh and English systems. In that case the Upper Tribunal concluded that a tribunal could consider a placement unsuitable where a child had formed an entrenched view in opposition to attending a school which was part of their significant and complex needs.
As Sean has helpfully advised, it would be useful for the case statement to set out a factual background of what happened that explains why the child is unwilling and anxious about attending the school and being around those children. As part of that chronological narrative, it may also be useful to set out any constructive steps that were taken by the child, parents or professionals to resolve the issues giving rise to the negative experiences and what steps have since been taken to help the child manage her anxiety surrounding those past experiences.
The supporting evidence mentioned in Sean’s response would significantly assist as would any independent evidence about the child’s difficulties – is there anyone independent who has witnessed her refusal to go to certain towns due to wanting to avoid these children who can provide a statement?
Engaging with the LA and proposed school for support may be beneficial. While it would not give an accurate impression of a school day, it may be possible to arrange for the child to visit out of school hours. It would be useful to find out whether they are able to put safeguards in place to ensure/minimise the risk of the children meeting and what they can put in place to support the child, such as through initial contact at home, managed transition or counselling. While it may be useful to try strategies proposed, I am in no way suggesting that the parent or child needs to go along with the proposals if they believe are likely to be harmful. If ways can be found through this process to make the placement a success, then great. However if not, then this engagement with the school and LA, without success, may also be used as evidence that the child’s needs cannot be met at that placement despite support.
Lastly, the parent needs to be clear on what they are asking for instead of a placement at that school. This could either be a placement at another school or (again as Sean mentioned) EOTIS provision.
10 Oct 2025
- 05 Oct 2025
-
Other
|
Other
Can't answer yes or no.:
I do not claim to be an expert in the special educational needs framework in Wales, and the following is provided for general information only and should not be taken as legal advice. These observations draw on the Nodi No-nonsense Guide to ALN Law in Wales (Civitas Chambers, version 1.1, November 2024), which explains the key provisions of the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 (ALNET), the Additional Learning Needs (Wales) Regulations 2021, and the ALN Code 2021. A copy of the Guide can be freely downloaded from the Support SEND Kids website (www.supportsendkids.org), and it is strongly recommended that parents obtain one, as it provides clear explanations and practical examples across all stages of the ALN process.
Where a child has been permanently excluded from mainstream schools and now has a local-authority-maintained IDP, a parent may appeal to the Education Tribunal for Wales (ETW) if they believe that the school named in Section 2D of the plan is unsuitable. The Nodi Guide explains at Chapter 09 (paras. 09.01–09.15) and in paragraphs 23.59–23.67 of the ALN Code that a school should only be named where it is “appropriate in all the circumstances.” In some cases, the concern may not relate to the adequacy of the Additional Learning Provision (ALP) itself, but to whether the school environment enables the child to access that provision in practice. Where a child’s anxiety or trauma is such that the environment would effectively deny access to learning, this may form a legitimate ground of appeal (Nodi Guide, para. 09.09).
A case statement might therefore set out the factual background, noting previous difficulties and the specific reasons why the child’s attendance at the named school would be inappropriate. The statement should avoid emotive or speculative language, instead explaining clearly how the environment would prevent meaningful engagement with education. Reference may also be made to section 53 of ALNET, which requires local authorities to consider education otherwise than in school (EOTIS) where attendance at school is not suitable (Nodi Guide, Ch. 02.06–02.09), and to section 6 of ALNET, which gives effect to the child’s right to express their views in accordance with Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Nodi Guide, Ch. 05.02–05.08).
Supporting evidence is essential. As highlighted in Chapters 05 (paras. 05.09–05.14) and 07 (paras. 07.01–07.07) of the Nodi Guide, reliable evidence—such as reports from GPs, CAMHS clinicians, or educational psychologists—can demonstrate that the child’s anxiety or trauma response is genuine and has a substantial impact on access to education. Evidence of past exclusions, attendance records, or staff observations can help to provide context and corroboration. Where appropriate, the child’s own account may also assist in illustrating their perspective, provided it is presented sensitively and with suitable support (ALN Code para. 5.23).
It may also be relevant to note that the Education Tribunal for Wales has jurisdiction to hear disability discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010, as extended by the Education (Wales) Measure 2009. The Nodi Guide (Ch. 01.12, paras. 01.46–01.52) explains that the duty to make reasonable adjustments includes ensuring that disabled pupils can access education without substantial disadvantage (Equality Act 2010, ss. 20–21). Where a child’s anxiety or emotional distress arises from a recognised disability, parents may therefore wish to consider whether there are overlapping issues of disability discrimination. This may be particularly relevant if the child’s exclusion or difficulties in school attendance were related to, or arose from, the effects of that disability, as the Tribunal can consider whether such treatment amounted to disability discrimination (Nodi Guide, para. 01.49; Equality Act 2010, s. 15).
If the child is currently without access to education, or their wellbeing is deteriorating, the parent can also draw the Tribunal’s attention to the urgency of the situation. The Nodi Guide (Ch. 12 – Tribunal Procedure, paras. 12.09–12.13) explains that the ETW has discretion to expedite a hearing where delay would cause significant detriment or where an interim decision may be necessary to secure educational continuity. Any such request should be supported by clear evidence—such as medical reports or attendance data—showing the impact of delay on the child’s education or mental health.
Overall, the parent’s case should combine a concise factual account with objective, well-supported evidence to demonstrate that, although the ALP may be appropriate in content, the environment of the named school would prevent the child from accessing that provision safely or effectively. The Nodi No-nonsense Guide to ALN Law in Wales provides detailed commentary on both placement appeals (Ch. 09) and disability discrimination claims (Ch. 01.12), and consulting it via the Support SEND Kids website will help parents ensure their submissions are properly framed within the relevant legal framework and Tribunal procedure.
I hope this note is of some assistance. I must, however, emphasise that I am not an expert on the Welsh framework, and it would be helpful if someone with greater expertise could add their perspective.
Regards,
Sean Kennedy
05 Oct 2025
|
1 Comment