-
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