EHCP Challenges
Hello,
I've just joined the forum and would appreciate guidance on the legality of my child's situation and the best next steps to secure a suitable placement.
Child Details:
Age: 5 and in Year 1 (Key Stage 1) mainstream school.
Needs: Complex ASD, significant anxiety, and acute sensory regulation needs documented by an Educational Psychologist (EP) and Occupational Therapist (OT).
Academic: Academically able, working at or above age-related expectations (ARE) in core subjects.
AR just concluded request for specialist placement was rejected
My child's school is in another Borough.
The Crisis: Unlawful Provision (Section 19 Breach)
My child has been on a severely reduced, non-statutory timetable (part-time attendance) at their current mainstream school for over eight months due to their needs exceeding the school's capacity to keep them regulated and safe for a full day.
The Local Authority (LA) recently claimed in a formal response that they were "unaware" of this reduced timetable prior to the recent Annual Review (AR).
Crucially, this claim is refuted by their own file:
A Multi-Agency Referral Form (MARF), referenced the crisis meeting regarding the child's "provision/timetable.", the file was sent to the LA.
The LA-commissioned EP Report, which was distributed by the LA caseworker as part of the AR pack, explicitly documented the part-time hours.
The LA's failure to act on this known breach for months constitutes an ongoing failure to secure full-time suitable education (a breach of Section 19 of the Education Act 1996).
Procedural Maladministration
A comprehensive private Occupational Therapy (OT) Report detailing essential sensory and physical adaptions was submitted to the LA for the AR.
This OT Report was omitted from the formal evidence presented to the decision-making panel when the EHCP amendments were decided.
Questions and Strategic Concerns
Legal Impact: Do the documented S19 breach (ongoing reduced timetable, effectively an exclusion without process) and the clear procedural error (omission of the OT Report) provide sufficient legal grounds to successfully argue at Tribunal that the current mainstream placement is unsuitable?
Next Steps: I have formally escalated these issues to the Head of Children's Services, demanding an urgent re-paneling and a written action plan. What further legal steps (e.g., a threat of Judicial Review, specific naming of potential placements) should I take now?
Future Suitability Dilemma: I need to find a placement that meets two essential requirements at Key Stage 1/2:
Therapeutic Structure: Requires a small group setting (e.g., max 10 students) with a high adult-to-child ratio (e.g., 1:5) and guaranteed, non-conditional access to low-stimulus, therapeutic spaces (Specialist Provision).
Academic Rigour: Must provide the full Key Stage 1/2 National Curriculum and be able to differentiate provision upwards to prevent academic stagnation and ensure he reaches his full potential, rather than being limited to a foundation curriculum.
How can I ensure the Final EHCP (specifically Sections E, F, and I) is written to legally mandate a placement that provides this therapeutic structure without forcing integration into a failed mainstream setting, yet also guarantees the necessary academic pathway?
Thank you in advance for any insights on navigating this critical stage.
