Can you do Elective Home Education and lodge an send tribunal for EHCP?

Hi my child (mentioned before on here) is ASD with PDA. He is out of school following breakdown of place, unmet needs and autistic burnout. We have had an annual review and some helpful changes to section F but also large omissions that do not recognise his SEMH needs, levels of anxiety and requirement for therapeutic educational environment. Despite clear EP recommendations in the report that current mainstream setting is not appropriate, current setting has been listed in Section I - I don't even believe any school was consulted in the review process regarding Section I and the LA have just left it as the existing school (so it appears). We are going through the process of mediation and lodging an appeal for Sec B,C, F and I. At the same time, existing setting has arranged Alternative Provision in the form of a tutor. This is not working out well and is to the detriment of his wellbeing so it has been cancelled. The first visit from the tutor prompted him to elope outside, run through the gate and onto the high street in his bare feet and was extremely heightened. He has not been like this for 6 months so we are seriously contemplating elective home education as we do not want to continue to expose him to an education system that has done nothing but bring him trauma. Is it permissive to do home elective education whilst at the same time lodging an appeal at the send tribunal? Do you think the 'optics' may erode our chances of getting a place? or would this factor deem to be irrelevant in terms of the law?

If the appeal for sections B, F and I are resolved prior to tribunal, can we still go to tribunal for sections D and H?

We are close to resolving section F with the local authority. However, sections D and H are very much disputed. We strongly need a social care recommendation from the tribunal but are worried that if sections B, F and I are resolved, we would lose our legal entitlement to section H being reviewed at tribunal.

EHCP quantification when not on Ed Psych report

My primary-aged child has an EHCP, and a recent independent EP report identified severe dyscalculia. We are planning to request an early review / amendment of the EHCP. We have not yet sent the report to the LA or to the school.

The EP report clearly sets out the nature of provision required—specifically an individualised, structured maths programme (CPA approach) delivered by a teacher with specialist SpLD/dyscalculia qualifications and experience.

However, due to the psychologist’s terms (they have strict terms and conditions and do not undertake tribunal/EHCP quantification work. We went back to them and they strengthened the recommendations as far as they could within their remit.) the report does not state exact hours, frequency, duration, or group size.

We know Section F must be detailed, specific, and quantified, and that the LA has a legal duty to secure it—meaning they cannot delegate the quantification to the school's discretion.

What is the most effective route to get an enforceable Section F without giving the LA an excuse to issue vague wording like "regular" or "as required" ? Do I just send in the EP report and ask the LA to amend Section F and determine the appropriate frequency, duration, group size and level of expertise based on the professional evidence?
All advice greatly appreciated

Year 5 Missed Annual Review

My son has an EHCP and is entering Year 6. His Year 5 Annual Review was missed, which is a major issue because our preferred secondary school has a practice of requiring the EHCP consultation to be sent before June of Year 5 for consideration. Now, the primary school staff and SENCO are putting pressure on us during a transition meeting, arguing that the school is 'too academic and busy' for him and pointing to his 'Working Towards Standards' profile to steer us toward alternative placements. We want to name our preferred secondary school as our absolute first preference on the Phase Transfer form. In practice, what are our legal rights regarding this missed Year 5 review and the secondary school's June timeline, and can the school or local authority override our choice based on subjective claims that a school is 'too academic'?

Thank you so much for your questions. It is an academy and mainstream. I won partially an appeal in January 2026 and they amended the EHCP in April ( not sure what they amended ). Now we have an annual review meeting in September with the school but I think there was a missed annual review in Year 5. Plus the secondary schools told me last year that usually to get a place the EHCP should be sent to them before June in year 5 -

Can we appeal on the basis EP requirements not being included in section F? Can we also appeal on area of primary need?

Hello, I have a full time EHCP for my son who has ASD. He is currently out of school since Feb 26 following break down of mainstream placement and autistic burnout/trauma from unmet needs.

Can we appeal recent EHCP review on the basis of EP report recommendations not being included in section F?

The EP report has specified the following:

The way forward with the highest chance of success is likely to be the following: An appropriate adult is identified to make contact with J's family, initially spending time in the house with parent/carer. o This adult very gradually becomes acquainted with J in a friendly way, with no demands or expectations placed upon him. o The adult is eventually able to play some games with J and/or talk to him about areas of specific interest to him. o The adult and J research areas of interest and then create some record of this. o The adult meets with J in an agreed neutral place to carry on the contact. o J visits an appropriate setting (without school in its title) with the adult. o J attends the setting with the adult. o Other pupils are introduced very gradually. Academic demands are introduced in a way which ensures easy success. o Academic demands are gradually increased, with enhanced support whenever needed.

This is not in section F of the reviewed EHCP. The LA do not think the requirement for slow transition back into education needs to be cited in section F this for the reason:

While the detailed transition process outlined in the report has not been specified within Section F of the EHCP, the Local Authority would expect any educational setting working with J to take account of the professional recommendations within the report when planning and implementing his transition arrangements. Section F of the EHCP specifies the long-term special educational provision required to meet J's identified needs rather than setting out a detailed step-by-step implementation plan.

We asked for SEMH as the primary area of need but LA have rejected this and have stated his primary need is ASD. Can we appeal this? I am presuming it doesn't really make that much difference but we would also like a SEMH school in section I but for some reason they have put his mainstream school where he is still on roll (where we were informed they could not meet need but agreed to keep him on roll and pay for tuition until such time a placement becomes available).

To summarise,

Can we appeal on section F? (not including EPs recommendation for a slow re-integration back into setting), and what case law is out there regarding section F/EP recommendations?
Can we appeal on area of primary need? (ASD/vs SEMH?) - Does it matter so much when the young person has trauma based needs? Surely you can be SEMH and autistic? Its just if yo are autistic I understand you are more likely to face trauma. Does it help to appeal this though if we would like a SEMH placement?
Can we appeal placement? (LA stated mainstream but we understand mainstream cant meet need, parents would like SEMH?)

Many thanks

Funding for Private Provision

My daughter is diagnosed AuDHD and receives high rate daily living DLA and low mobility. No EHCP.

She attended a private Waldorf school until it closed down in 2024. Waldorf has a very different approach to education which was accessible to her.

After the closure there was a nearly 2yr court battle between myself and her father as he tried to force her into state school. CAFCASS concluded that would not be in her best interests and would in fact be harmful for her to attend state school and it was court ordered that she would not be made to. She was to be home educated and attend a Waldorf home education group four days a week - highlighting that the Waldorf approach is the type of education that she can access. I was able to receive financial support for this through UC as it was Ofsted registered as childcare.

She has now aged out of that provision and wishes to attend another private Waldorf school, ideally starting in Sept for the next two years for her GCSE's. (She would be going into year 10)

Unfortunately the fees would stretch the family budget to it's max and the schools own funding applications have closed for this upcoming year.

What funding sources are available?

Would a section 19 be applicable here?

How do I get an EHCP without a diagnosis and how do I access an alternate provision if we don't get an EHCP?

I have a 13 yr old son who has been home educated since Sep 25. We were failed by our primary school when they kept referring him for ASD and ADHD and telling us that he was "managing with scaffolding" when he was clearly struggling and failed all his SATs. He went to a private school for 1 year and they deferred him back a year because of his delayed learning, they did a Sandwell assessment that showed he was working at 7-8years old in every area, but then the school closed down so we chose to home educate (there was huge anxiety around school and learning and it had started manifesting as self harm also).

Since doing so we have realised just how far behind he is. The only official diagnosis we have is a visual processing disorder and after 3 ASD and ADHD referrals they all came back as inconclusive. We have an anxiety related Tourettes diagnosis and the consultant there wrote that he has an obvious learning disorder but then discharged us so we have no follow up for that. Our GP has just told us to get in touch with the LA to get an EHCP but I dont think that will do much good when hes home ed so we have no capacity for an ed-psych or similar. We are struggling with traditional home-ed as there is severe anxiety around learning in the traditional sense so I would like to let him access an alternative provision for 1 or 2 days a week but I cant even find anything that we can fund privately.

So I suppose my question is in 3 parts -
1. do I need to get a diagnosis or where do I get any support for a "learning disorder" and how do we find out the full extent of it? (hes had testing for global delay that was negative)
2. I know I need to start the process for an EHCP but Im at a loss how I do this as a home educator and without a diagnosis and no professional/medical support?
3. Is an EHCP the only way to access an alternative provision?

Annual Review Process - Can the LA cherry pick professional reports?

A quick bit of background. We have fought tooth and nail to have a SALT provision added to our son’s EHCP. This took well over a year and a full Tribunal process to achieve (We had to find and pay for the SALT provision through the whole tribunal). Even when ordered by the court, the LA has taken months to put anything in place. We have just undergone another Annual Review, and as part of that we submitted a new SALT report that increases the provision to 1:1 weekly 45 min SALT intervention at the school. The draft has just been issued, and they have ignored the updated provision, so we realise they are going to force us to go down another 18 months of Tribunal process to avoid having to pay for any more provision.

However, the LA have taken the updated part B from the new professional report and put that in the draft plan. They have then omitted section F from that same report, as that would be the bit that costs them money.

Would this be illegal, or at least a wrong use of the policy/code of practice? Could we use this to submit another complaint that we can raise to level 2, so we can then raise an ombudsman case or a undertake a judicial review?

My thinking is that it would contravene Paragraph 9.69 of the SEN and Disability Code of Practice specifically “Provision must be specified for each and every need specified in Section B” and court ruling on ‘R v The Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte E [1992] 1 FLR 377 CA’.

My source (https://www.ipsea.org.uk/r-v-the-secretary-of-state-for-education-and-science-ex-parte-e-1992-1-flr-377-ca)

By adding the new SALT comments on need into Section B, but then omitting the new provision in Section F, as specified by the professional report, they cannot claim that the provision is specified for each and every need in Section B.

I am no expert, so I realise that this might be clutching at straws. I have ten days left to comment on the draft (which was also late), but going back to the Tribunal again fills me with dread. I hope there is some way I may be able to force them to update the provision, but I realise that might be unlikely.

I thank you for any help you are able to give.

Edit - Spelling

EA 1996 s19 & what is suitable

Autistic, demand-avoidant Child with EBSNA and autistic burnout not able to attend school for mental health reasons. After 7 weeks of asking the Council for alternative education, school offered a tutor to visit at home. Refused by us (parents) as not suitable (child very protective of ‘safe space’ at home & needed to be offered something they could engage with). A PAP letter was sent from our solicitor to the Council and the response was that an allocated place was available (at the school he was unable to attend) and therefore the Council were not in breach of s19. EHCP was issued the day after this, naming the same school (who say can’t meet his needs) in Section I, and we are appealing.

Was it unreasonable of us to refuse the home tutor, and has the Council discharged its duty with any offer of education?