Is this omission on ECHP draft legal? What would you advise as the next step?

My son’s EHCP draft arrived with an email stating that “I just want to highlight that as an Occupational Report was not requested at NA2, and xxx had been discharged from their service there is not any OT input in the draft. If a new referral for an OT is made for Ethan and subsequently we receive a report this can be added to his EHCP once it is finalised."

My child (6) has complex needs - a number of different systems involved
Speech disorder - Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS)
Physical disorder - Fine motor skills difficulties, gross motor skills difficulties, coordination difficulties - Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD)
Social communication difficulties - Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Occupation report was requested at NA2 and request was followed up on 4 separate occasions. NHS OT reports from March 2023 and July 2023 are available. Provision recommendation from private therapist who sees him at school was submitted to ECHNA and acknowledged. Community pediatrician report refers to Occupational therapy need, neurologist report refers to occupational therapy need, Educational psychologist report refers to occupational therapy need and meeting with the private occupational therapist. School submission refers to occupational therapy need, intervention provided by private OT and daily OT activities with a TA at school. Section B states DCD and fine motor difficulties. Other sections in ECHP refer to fine motor difficulties but section E and Section F are empty for Sensory and / or physical: maintaining good health, with outcomes listed as “not stated” and also for Independence and preparation for adulthood.

Where do we stand with this and what should our next be along with notifying that we do not accept the draft?

Thank you.

If an error in law is made, can social care decisions be challenged at UTT? Would this be considered an error?

LA have an autism plus policy to access the Children with Disabilities team (Level 3). Although the published policy states that children at Level 2 can receive direct payments/short breaks in practice, they can't.

We submitted as evidence the LA response to stage one complaint, which specifically states, "Direct payments is a specialist service that are only available to children who meet the criteria for the children with disabilities team. This is also true of other specialist short break services". In that letter, it also sets out the reason the threshold for CWD is not met as he doesn't have a severe learning disability + Autism. The LA offered an Early Help Assessment. and referred to the Local Offer and the HAF programme as the recommended provision.

This was written by the manager of the CWD team who was the LA witness at the hearing. The appeal was BFI + Social Care but section I was already conceded and he attends a s41 specialist. The LA did not submit any information regarding the social care element of the appeal until five days before when they added this witness and her statement.

I presumed that the purpose of including social care as an extended appeal was so needs and provisions would go into the EHCP, and if LA and I disagreed, the tribunal would make recommendations. Once it became clear that the LA was not responding to that element, I wasn't sure what recommendations the Judge could make.

During the hearing, my position was that the outcome of the Early Help Assessment was already pre-determined. That provision must be based on needs and not which team the child is with. I referenced the Liverpool LGO decision regarding what seems to be an identical practice. I wanted a recommendation for a children's and families assessment.

The Judge said that he would be recommending an Early Help Assessment because the LA is within its rights to apply a policy that children work through the stages starting at level 1. He said that the practice of short breaks/direct payments only being available to children with CWD was a 'miscommunication' even though the witness did not say at any point that children at stage 2 could also be eligible for short breaks.

Would this be classed as an error? Or have I misunderstood? I am thinking now the LGO would have been a better route, but I am presuming that will not be possible now as it's been to SENDIST.

What do I need to say to the EP to get an EHCP?

Hi there, my daughter is 3.5 years old and has recently been diagnosed with ASD and she is due to start school in September 2024. On 4th January 2024 the EP is coming to assess her at nursery for the EHCP process. I am really worried about this as when (a different) EP came to visit her before they said ‘there are other kids in this position that will not get an EHCP’ - however I (and the nursery SENDCo) don’t see how my daughter will be able to cope or learn anything at school without an EHCP. So basically I’m super worried the EP is going to assess my daughter based on what our local authority can afford rather than provide her the care that she needs.

I’m sure this is a common question but greatly appreciate any help!

Can I ask questions about the LA's response to our EHCP appeal without being in contempt of court?

I wasn't sure if it is legally permitted to ask a question on here that reveals the LAs position.

Can the LA refuse to attend a dissagreement resolution meeting and / or mediation prior to Tribunal?

I'm working with a family who were thinking of cancelling their Tribunal (luckily they haven't). They have been offered a Disagreement Resolution meeting by the mediation service. I am unsure if this is the same as formal mediation? Having waited 4 weeks for a meeting date the mediation service has responded as per below. I am at a loss as to what to advise further to the family now. Is there no statutory duty for the LA to attend either disagreement resolution and / or mediation?

After contacting your Local Authority, we have now received a response from them to your voluntary Disagreement Resolution request. On this occasion, your LA has, unfortunately, declined to participate in this meeting.

We are therefore closing this case. This does not preclude the possibility of the LA contacting you directly to attempt to resolve the problem. If we subsequently receive a response from your Local Authority, we will contact you to discuss further.

You may wish to consult your SEND Tribunal about your alternative options for proceeding with your Disagreement Resolution request.

We are in the final stages of EHCP. We have requested EOTAS (to pay for online school) and a personal budget. The LA have said "County Independent panel have reviewed your request for EOTAS and personal budget to fund Kings Inter High, further information is required before EOTAS can be considered. We will be contacting F...... high school to establish if they are able to support funding Kings Inter High as E. remains on their school roll. We will also be issuing consultations to independent settings to establish suitability; these consultations will be shared with you before they are issued." My question is does the LA pay for EOTAS - why are they asking the school? The LA tried to unroll her from mainstream but we said they could not do this until they have provided alternative provision - and we request EOTAS - were we wrong to do so?

My daughter is happy at online school. She has tried two mainstream schools and cannot manage. She will not attend school in person and the EP report is fairly conclusive with this regard.

Year 10 options

Hello,
My son is in year 9 at a mainstream secondary school, however is in a special unit there which they say is a school in between a special school and mainstream. My son is autistic and has speech and language delay. We have been told that for year 10 his options will be level 1 maths and English. I have looked at another school in the area that teaches autistic children and they are offered so much more such as lots of vocational programmes along side there maths and English. Do you think I would be best trying to move him to somewhere that could accommodate him to do that? Would I have a fight on my hands to get the local authority to agree to move him? I am just so worried that he is not being offered more options and the school system is failing him again. Has anyone any positive stories of what their child went on to do?
Thank you in advance

If YP is in specialist residential placement and is looking to stay there at post-16 transfer but the LA name the local FE college instead, can the YP continue attending the existing specialist placement until the Appeal process completed or do they have to attend the provision named by the LA in the interim?

Post-16 transfer wish to have continuing placement in specialist residential

In Y8, my son has a diagnosis of ASD but has not yet been assessed for an EHCP. We took him out of school last week due to us feeling they can't meet his needs, anxiety around school and bullying. Struggling to decide what would be the best thing to do: he has found the secondary school environment so difficult that he doesn't want to attend a school, but I feel unable to educate him myself. School are scaring me with talk of me keeping him out on unauthorised absence. What would be the best course of action to make him comfortable in school, and keep him in the education system?

Is there a legal list of what can and cannot be included in an EOTAS package? The LA want to include maths and English tutors which my son can’t engage with due to school trauma. The LA’s EP has said maths and English needs to be embedded within activities.

I am suggesting activities such as building a remote control vehicle, theatre and museum visits and learning about tractors from an agricultural engineer (rather than a tutor). The EP said subjects should help his future career. He wants to be a farmer. The last time my son accessed a tutor he ripped up the exercise book and ate the pages. It was not because of the tutor (who was patient and listened) but because of the school trauma and the trigger of work he was being asked to do. They are also looking at science tutors. It’s appears to be their section 19 offer rather than based on the EP’s report.

Phase transfer - negative consultation mainstream

Our preferred mainstream has responded to say unsuitable due to aptitude, ability. The reasons they have provided are nothing that can’t be overcome and would be applicable to the school the LA have named too although their school responded to say “may” be able to meet need. What I’m struggling to understand looking at sections 33 & 39 is how parental preference & mainstream school being made suitable doesn’t support our choice for a particular mainstream.

A school complaints panel has ruled that the Head teacher can deviate from providing what is well stated in section F of the EHCP, is this lawful?

I made a complaint to the LA and the mainstream primary school that my daughter was not receiving her education in line with section F of the EHCP which was very clearly and precisely stated following Tribunal.
The LA refused to address my complaint telling me that the school must consider it. The complaint went to Stage 2 at the school and the panel ruled it was reasonable and defensible for the Head not to provide SaLT, now and next trays, noise cancelling headphones etc to my child and dismissed my complaint. I am within 12 weeks of their decision, can I challenge this decision at Judicial Review or by other means? Much of the provision is now being made ironically, although some elements are outstanding.
I have written evidence directly from the Head refusing my child the provision because it was his opinion that she did not need it.

Can council name an out of area mainstream school instead of a local school if both can meet need?

We visited a large number of local mainstream schools (including some suggested by SEN case worker) but didn't think any of them could meet the needs in the EHCP. Therefore we named a specialist school, and an out of area mainstream more experienced in supporting children with similar needs to our daughter. The LA consulted with an additional 4 schools which we / SEN case worker did not consider. We had been clear to our SEN Caseworker that our preference was for a mainstream school if they could meet all of the needs in the EHCP, but that we had not found one locally.

LA named the out of area mainstream due to 'parental preference', and are therefore saying they won't provide transport as they could have named a local school.

What are the scenarios where LA can name a school that was not listed in parental preference? Can LA account for broader information by provided by the parents, not just the actual listed schools?

What is the cost of moving an EHCP from one local authority to another?

Our son has an excellent and up to date EHCP and is extremely happy at a specialist school. How we the school is an hour in a taxi from our home. We would like to reduce his journey and move closer to the school. However we are concerned the new local authority would name a new school within the 15 day window they have to review his EHCP. We are concerned the cost to fight this could escalate.

Interim Provision

The YP has been out of school for two years and the LA have not provided any educational provision. The Tribunal has been adjourned for the third time and the LA are supposed to provide suitable interim provision in the meantime. The YP has ADHD and the LA are proposing online learning which he cannot engage in. His assessments and EHCP note he struggles to remain seated for longer than 10 minutes and cannot concentrate for more than 2-3 minutes. A practical course that allows for movement is recommended. The YP wants a construction course (14-16 years) with functional skills maths and English. A local learning provider have offered a place using their own funding for the YP up to the date of the Tribunal providing an interim measure for the YP. The parent would like to accept this but the LA have cited section 42 (5)
The parent is not however suggesting that they wish to electively home educate at any point - in fact quite the opposite. They want to use this as an interim measure up to Tribunal where the placement is to be defined as sections B F and I are disputed and under appeal. The LA proposal for online learning does not meet need or provide the current provision listed in the EHCP and to date the LA have failed to provide any provision at all since June 2022. If the parent sends the child to the construction course in the interim given that there is no provision in place from the LA making it clear that this is simply an interim arrangement just until Tribunal and not elective home education can the LA cute section 42(5). Please consider that they are failing under section 42(2)

My son has a terrible EHCP in place (current review at draft stage), but he’s been rejected from a Sen school by LA, and mainstream nursery won’t have him as his EHCP doesn’t reflect his needs - what options do I have?

My son will be 3 in July. His current EHCP reflects very little needs, which is very inaccurate (his paediatrician has written that he needs 1:1 in mainstream, just for context). The LA rejected his school place request at early review quoting the child and families act, but didn’t actually give a reason why. The school we applied for takes from age 3. The LA have said they will consult with the school about looking into the school place April 2025. The mainstream nursery have said they can’t secure extra funding needed to support my son at nursery with his current EHCP as it is, so what options do I have?
I’m very confused if a school take from 3, why we would be rejected now but put forward for consideration next April instead as surely this is based on his current needs?

School cannot meet needs of child but do not yet have an EHCP - what happens next?

Our son (6) is in a wonderful mainstream school. He has a diagnosis of a rare genetic condition that is linked with behavioural issues and/or learning disabilities. He clearly has severe behavioural issues but no formal assessment yet. The school have done everything they can to support him including almost full time 1-2-1 support. We were just about to start the EHCP process but his behaviour has deteriorated massively the last month. He is increasingly violent towards other children and adults, including his support person. He is spending 90% of his time outside the classroom. He has now begun trying to escape the building and has almost managed on a few occasions. He is now a health and safety risk for himself and others.

The school tell me they have run out of options and can no longer manage him with their current resources. We are having an educational phychologist assessment on Thursday but clearly we can’t wait a year or more for the EHCP process to run its course. Sorry for the long winded context but my basic question is, in situations like this is there any sort of emergency support or is an EHCP expedited? He’s a danger to himself and others in the present situation. There is a specialist school nearby but I’m unclear if we can approach them without an EHCP. Any advice on what to ask/push for/ do would be really appreciated.

Provision for SEN Inclusion Funding in cross-county border situation

I could write war and peace on this so apologies in advance!

I have a two year old son who has Down Syndrome. Attends an amazing mainstream nursery full time who are fully supportive of him. Now he is two he is due to move to the next room, but his complex needs and lack of mobility means he needs additional support, and the staffing ratios in the room will not allow for them to give him almost 1:1 care, which he gets now (more by chance). We live in Hampshire, nursery is in Berkshire. We are right on the Hampshire/Berkshire/Surrey border so it's a fairly local nursery, my daughter attends the primary school it's attached to.

We have been trying to access Inclusion Funding since the day he started nursery and over a year later we still have none and are in a horrible gap. We have tried talking to Hampshire and Berkshire local authorities with each saying the other is responsible for the provision. My sons therapists (Physio, OT, Teacher of the Deaf, portage) are Hampshire based and cannot really go into the school to support as it's in a different county. We cannot access the Berkshire versions of these in school as we don't live in Berkshire. Can you see where i'm going with this?!

We requested an EHC assessment from Hampshire due to the lack of any support we are receiving and this has been declined on the basis that he is well known to Hampshire Children's Services and they feel his therapies are adequate for his needs and we adopt a wait and see approach. Well, this wait and see approach is meaning he cannot proceed in his development! We are waiting on mediation although Hampshire SENDIAS have said to cancel this and go straight to tribunal given our background.

I feel we are getting more confusion the more we investigate. Hampshire told us that there was definitely a reciprocal agreement in place with Berkshire to access Inclusion Funding, yet Berkshire deny this.

I have called Hampshire Social Services twice to beg for a disability social worker to support us in this (as well as some other things) and to call a Team Around The Child Meeting as i feel getting everybody in the room together would be the best thing. However despite me, as a parent, sobbing and begging for support i was told we don't fit the criteria (my son is considered 'age appropriate' and must have a lifelong disability - er, he has Down Syndrome?!) and to Google parent support in our area. Considering a formal complaint to them but mentally i've had to take a break.

I want my son to progress in nursery, to be able to move in the nursery with his peers, which is what is recommended for children with Down Syndrome (and i have this documented from a professional). However without the funding, we can't do this and I am fearful that the nursery, as amazing as they are, will not be able to support his needs.

Any advice on where to progress from here?!

Does anyone know what the legal position is in relation to costs in the SEND Tribunal?

Just spoken to the officer at the LGO who made the decision referred to in this question: https://supportsendkids.org/question/1681234603118

He said one of the reasons the LGO doesn't have jurisdiction is because the SEND Tribunal has the power to award costs. He said he doesn't recognise my assertion that the general rule in the SEND Tribunal is not to award costs. He said this would surprise him if it was indeed the case.

Does anyone know what the legal position is in relation to costs in the SEND Tribunal? Has the SEND Tribunal issued any guidance on this point? I was advised by our solicitors when appealing our child's EHCP that the general rule in the SEND Tribunal is that there should be no order for costs. We therefore made no such application. The officer from the LGO said he believed the SEND Tribunal did make orders for costs and that therefore the LGO couldn't look into recompense of legal fees because it would involve stepping on the toes of another body. My point is that if the other body - i.e. the SEND Tribunal - isn't using its powers and is in fact actively encouraging claimants not to - then where does that leave claimants - other than in debt if they've had to instruct a solicitor to try and obtain justice?

I asked the LGO officer if he knew what proportion of cases that came before the SEND Tribunal resulted in a costs order being made. He said he had no idea. Obviously, it his not for him to know this but I just left wondering if this information is readily available or if it's worth me making a FOI request? The officer did say there is lacuna in the law in relation the LGO's jurisdiction ending when appeal rights become available, but he assured me the LGO had fully and properly considered R (ER) v Commissioner for Local Administration & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1407 (Hillingdon) and applied it correctly in my case. Have I reached a dead end with this or are there cases pending that might make me making an application for judical review (to be put on hold pending such a decision) worth while? Many thanks.

where the Parents and the LA have been in Sendist Tribunal for nearly two years , the reports are outdated . The LA have had over 7 extensions of time , Can I appeal this with a JR ?

first tier tribunal but reports outdated by 2 years , no support from health or education during that time