Named schools on statement

[Minxygal]

Met a mum yesterday in the last stages of statement whos been invited to a meeting to explain why the school the LEA want the child to go to is not suitable. I explained that this isnt how it's supposed to work and it is their place to prove to mum why her choice of school isnt the best for her child not the other way around. I think it's really bad that mum is, in my opinion, being manipulated like this. Has this happened to anyone else?

[pumpkinpie]

No but I have been to meetings at my own request with the lea to argue about statement provision. In the end we agreed to disagree and I did get the school I wanted.

I dont really understand this and feel really its for them to say why they think it will meet her childs needs so she has something to look at and argue about. I prefer to have things in writing and take the agenda etc from there. I would not go to any meeting to be talked at which this sounds like.

Whose bright idea is this, cos I agree it sounds very odd?

[Minxygal]

the LEA's, whats confused me though is that although it isnt the school mum has put down as her preference the LEA has invited the head of the school mum hasnt chosen that the LEA want the child to go to to the meeting so apparently mum can explain to her face why she doesnt feel its the right school for her child.

I think this stinks and I've advised mum to state that it's their job to prove to her why the school she has picked isnt appropriate for her child not for her to defend her decision. I think this is underhanded and unethical and goes against the education act 1996.

 

I'm going to suggest mum contacts SENDIST and go for the fight, thing is the child is 5, managed in mainstream for only 3 weeks before the parents were asked to apply for a statement, it's important mm makes the right decision.

[pumpkinpie]

At 5 parents just arent clued up enough to know how the lea works.

So I am right in thinking the childs started in mainstream but they now want a statement and the child to go to special school?

Just a bit confused?

[Minxygal]

Yes at 5 she started mainstream but within weeks her needs were so complex they think she belongs in a special school.

[Minxygal]

As do her parents, just not the one the LEA want. The school mum and dad want isnt a state school and of course they will struggle with that as I know the LEA have no obligation to provide this, but it's the pressure for the child to go to the school of the LEA's choice that I'm uncomfortable with and the way they've gone about it.

[pumpkinpie]

Have they looked around the special schools in the area, checked their ofsted reports etc? Personally I would go and look at them (even if its just to say I had).

What they will have to prove is why none of the lea special schools could meet their childs needs and not that this special school they want is better.

In mine I went through all the lea special schools and wrote down why they couldnt meet my childs needs, this was my focus rahter than why the one I wanted was so much better.

I would get start getting as much info together as possible. Get some advice off ipsea but be prepared that they will probally have to go to tribunal.

 

They will need to start getting together independant reports to identify her needs asap(and ensure any professioanls could go to the tribunal if needed).

[pumpkinpie]

What is the different focus of the independant special school they want?

[Kathryn]

It does sound as though the parent is being intimidated. Probably best to save the battle for Tribunal. She will, of course have to demonstrate that the LEA - preferred school isn't suitable, but she will be able to do so in a neutral environment with written evidence and witnesses to back her up.

 

K x

[paulr]

Met a mum yesterday in the last stages of statement whos been invited to a meeting to explain why the school the LEA want the child to go to is not suitable. I explained that this isnt how it's supposed to work and it is their place to prove to mum why her choice of school isnt the best for her child not the other way around. I think it's really bad that mum is, in my opinion, being manipulated like this. Has this happened to anyone else?

 

It's sort of supposed to work like that.

 

The real meat is in the statement itself. The statement should specify what's "wrong" with the child, then what sort of things are required to fix it - the named school should then match this description.

 

The LEA will then suggest school(s) that may match the statement, and the parent(s) are entitled to approach other schools as well. If the two sides cannot meet, then the parent has to show that the school the LEA names does not meet the child's needs, and the school that he/she/they want does.

 

This has to be explicit, for example, just "it seemed nicer" and other variants will not do.

 

An explicit reason may be "there is no SALT at that school" "that school has EBD children and the statement says she will react violently to aggressive behaviour", the more the merrier. The more explicit the provision in the "description of provision" the better - ideally you want to identify your target school and write this part so as to point to that school and to discount (on grounds of not meeting statement) the others. LEAs will, as ever, write waffly rubbish in statements if allowed so that they can put a child more or less anywhere. Writing things like "the teaching staff should be trained and experienced in dealing with autism" and the like helps.

 

There is also, established at SENDIST I believe, the responsibility of the LEA to spend money sensibly (Hahahahahahahaha). So if there are two schools that provide very similar provision, one may be LEA run and the other Independent (hence costs more), then the LEA can discount the independent one on inefficient use of money.

[Kazzen161]

I agree with what the others have said - the LEA only have to name a parent's preferred school if it is suitable for the child's needs, it is an efficient use of resources and is not disruptive to the education of others (as in the SEN Code of Practice). The LEA do not have to name the "best" school or a school that provides more than the child needs.

 

In effect, the LEA are right to want to know why the parent's feel the school the LEA are suggesting is not suitable (basically it means going through what the LEA school can't do, all with reference to the child's needs as in the Statement), but I would not really wish to be in a meeting with the Head of the school present. Obviously the LEA will argue that it is so they can answer any queries and reassure the parents, but it would feel a bit "them and us".

 

The LEA have to argue that their choice of school can meet all the child's needs, and the parent's have to argue that they can't.

 

I had to do this LOTS of times when I was trying to get the LEA to name an expensive secondary school for T.

[Minxygal]

Thanks all, the meeting took place and we challenged the inapropriateness of the head from the LEA's choice being at the meeting. We also challenged the fact that they hadnt even looked at the school of the parents choice which they are menat to. Mum and dad are now taking a look at the proposed statement as it is somewhat generic and thats not good

 

Thanks for the thoughts

 

Mand

[paulr]

This is rapidly becoming a problem. LEAs are issuing massive statements great chunks of which are boiler plate text, especially in the provision.