Can you give me your experiences of transition review into Primary School?

[Yossarian]

I'm looking for advice and experience around the transition review. We have to have a transition meeting with the LA in order to name a primary school (by law) on DS's statement by 15 Feb. The LA have behaved appallingly towards us right from the get go - we won a tribunal for an ABA programme which is costing the LA a significant amount of money. There is no doubt they will want to take this away from us as soon as they can.

 

Is a transition review similar in status to an annual review or more like an interim review?

Is it normal for the LA to have the child assessed at transition review?

Does the law cover transition review in the same way as annual review (eg submit reports 2 weeks before?)

 

Any experiences you have had would be very welcome.

[Karen A]

I'm looking for advice and experience around the transition review. We have to have a transition meeting with the LA in order to name a primary school (by law) on DS's statement by 15 Feb. The LA have behaved appallingly towards us right from the get go - we won a tribunal for an ABA programme which is costing the LA a significant amount of money. There is no doubt they will want to take this away from us as soon as they can.

 

Is a transition review similar in status to an annual review or more like an interim review?

Is it normal for the LA to have the child assessed at transition review?

Does the law cover transition review in the same way as annual review (eg submit reports 2 weeks before?)

 

Any experiences you have had would be very welcome.

 

I think transition review has the same status as AR .What year is your child in ? I presume this ia an ordinary yearly review to discuss transition and not an extra interim review ?

 

 

[quoteWhere a child is moving between phases of education such as from primary to

secondary school, the LA must amend the statement to name a new school by

15th February in year of transfer (Code 5.72)

The appropriate placement for secondary school should be considered at the year 5

review. If this is not possible then an early review should be arranged in the autumn

of year 6.

The 15th February deadline also applies to other phase transfers e.g. where LAs

have a middle school system. It does not apply to transfer from nursery to primary

school.][/quote]

 

I will post some links on AR which should be relevant as long as this is not an extra interim review.I found out the other day that the law does not apply Eg reports 2 weeks before in the same way if it is an interim or emergency review although others understand the details better than me.

 

http://www.autism.org.uk/Living-with-autism/Education/Primary-and-secondary-school/Extra-help-for-your-child-in-school/Extra-help-in-school-England-and-wales/Annual-review-England-Wales.aspx

http://www.autism.org.uk/Working-with/Education/Educational-professionals-in-schools/General-introductory-material-for-school-teachers/Education-moving-from-primary-to-secondary-school.aspx

http://www.ace-ed.org.uk/advice-about-education-for-parents/Special_Educational_Needs/understanding-annual-reviews

 

Karen.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Karen A

[Yossarian]

Thanks for your prompt reply!

 

My child is 4 and will be going into reception next Sept. This is not an annual review - it is purely an 'extra' transition review because we supposedly have to name a school on the statement by Feb 15. Or so the LA have told us. We haven't had any reviews up to now at all, partly due to LA incompetence but also due to tribunal issues.

 

I thought that a transition review should be like an interim review, but the LA seem to be rolling out the "we need to do reports" big gun. The only reason they would do this is to try and remove provision, unless they have a legal requirement to do so. Following the law is not something the LA are too worried about however.

 

Interesting quote about nursery to primary - that's exactly what is happening! That's from the ACE guide isn't it? So that leaves me with more questions than answers.

 

Do you know where in law that is stated?

Do we just name a school on our application form before the deadline for everyone else?

 

I suppose I should be contacting ACE...

Edited November 9, 2010 by Yossarian

[Karen A]

Thanks for your prompt reply!

 

My child is 4 and will be going into reception next Sept. This is not an annual review - it is purely an 'extra' transition review because we supposedly have to name a school on the statement by Feb 15. Or so the LA have told us. We haven't had any reviews up to now at all, partly due to LA incompetence but also due to tribunal issues.

 

I thought that a transition review should be like an interim review, but the LA seem to be rolling out the "we need to do reports" big gun. The only reason they would do this is to try and remove provision, unless they have a legal requirement to do so. Following the law is not something the LA are too worried about however.

 

Interesting quote about nursery to primary - that's exactly what is happening! That's from the ACE guide isn't it? So that leaves me with more questions than answers.

 

Do you know where in law that is stated?

Do we just name a school on our application form before the deadline for everyone else?

 

I suppose I should be contacting ACE...

 

Hi.

I thought your child was transferring from primary to secondary although I thought it a bit strange that you posted about an ABA programme.

I missed ''into'' in the thread heading.

So please forget what I posted earlier.The quote may not apply I will find the original if I can.

 

I think the information you need is not for transition at all but for a Statement for starting school.

Please ignore the earlier information.I will find some links for information that might be useful.

However if you have previously has ABA in a Statement and hope to keep it on transition to school I think it is definitely worth obtaining individual advice from ACE or NAS educational advice line.

 

 

8.132 of COP.

When a child is moving to a new school, particularly at phase transfer, the statement

should be amended to name in Part 4 both the current placement and the new

placement, stating an appropriate start date for the latter. This will make sure that

parents, children and the receiving school can plan well in advance of transfer, and entitle

parents to appeal to the SEN Tribunal in good time if they disagree with the named

school. At phase transfers, except from early education settings to the primary phase,

the statement must be amended no later than 15th February in the year of transfer. The

amended statement should specify the current school attended by the child (if any) and

the new school, indicating the date on which the child will move there

 

This appears to say that transition to primary is an exception.

According to the COP the LA probably should have had an AR depending on how long the Statement has been in place.

I have no idea whether this should be an AR and whether it is.

However I strongly advise you obtain some advice because a first School Statement is very important.

What type of provision is your child in currently and do you have a school in mind ?

 

Karen.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Karen A

[Karen A]

I have looked very hard and have to admit defeat which is unusual.

I cannot find any specific information on NAS or ACE which relates to transition from foundation stage to school with a Statement.

 

Karen.

[Grace]

Hi Yossarian,

 

Good advice already from Karen. I've also found:

 

4.46 (Statements for children under compulsory school age and over two):

 

LEAs should consider informally reviewing a statement for a child under five at least every six months to ensure that the provision continues to be appropriate to the child's needs. Such reviews would complement the statutory duty to carry out an annual review in accordance with the Regulations but would not necessarily require the same range of documentation so long as they reflected the significant changes which can take place in the progress of a child under the age of five. If necessary the statement should be amended following a six monthly review.

 

Section 9 (Annual Reviews)of the COP states that the info in Section 9 applies to all Annual Reviews apart from Year 9 and makes the point that this includes all maintained nursey schools. 8.95 also says that even if your child is educated 'otherwise' then the LEA must hold an Annual Review following the rules in Section 9.

This means that the Annual Review should follow all the 'rules' and as you have never had one, and the law is that you MUST have one at least every year, then this has to be an Annual Review. Reports due 2 weeks in advance and all. I don't know why the COP makes the distinction re Feb 15th, but it can only be in your interest to get a decision early, so that you have time to appeal before September if necessary.

 

Logically, if you are changing from a home ABA programme (?) then the move into school is going to bring with it quite significant changes, but are you wanting to move the ABA programme into the school i.e. have an ABA TA? Or are you wanting the ABA as an add-on? Because, if he/she is going into a primary, won't you actually NEED the statement to be changed to give some one to one?

 

That all said, I am sure they will use this as an opportunity to make any savings they can but it would seem logical that they would need professional reports to determine what help your child needs.

 

Obviously you will have the right of appeal and it seems to me that when you have won something significant, you seem to be constantly fighting to keep hold of it!

 

Hope that helps a little/x

Edited November 9, 2010 by Grace

[BusyLizzie100]

Check out the CoP 4:46

 

'LEAs should consider informally reviewing a statement for a child under five at least every six months to ensure that the provision continues to be appropriate to the child's needs. Such reviews would complement the statutory duty to carry out an annual review in accordance with the Regulations but would not necessarily require the same range of documentation so long as they reflected the significant changes which can take place in the progress off a child under the age of five. If necessary the statement should be amended following a six monthly review.'

 

According to Regulation 19(2), 'Phase Transfers' means a transfer from primary to middle school; primary school to secondary school; middle to secondary school; or secondary school to an institution specified in section 2(2A) of the Act.

 

So technically it looks like your LA is mistaken. But worth checking with IPSEA or ACE or the NAS anyway.

 

Lizzie x

 

Edited to add that Grace's post wasn't there when I started - I wouldn't have repeated the info!!

Edited November 9, 2010 by BusyLizzie100

[call me jaded]

I would let the LA work to the 15 Feb 'deadline' because that will give you a chance to appeal in time for September admissions if necessary. It is normal to have a full set of reports for the new school to have a look at before they can say whether or not they can meet the needs. As they were done recently it shouldn't take too long to update them. Your LA is following good practice so far. The cynical me says that's so they look good if it goes to appeal again.

[Sally44]

I would recommend you get advice from IPSEA or the NAS about this review.

It would be useful to get some clarification from your LEA as to what they are going to do. Ie. Annual Review, interim review, re-assessment etc. Have they called it a phased transfer review?

 

When did you go to tribunal? How old are your reports?

 

Any new reports submitted towards this review will be the most up to date reports. Your LEA may try to use only those reports as the most up to date ones. That is what my LEA has done with me. My independent reports were just over a year old at the time.

 

However you also submit your reports for the review and so you must submit all your reports and evidence again that you used at the Tribunal. The CoP says that ALL evidence must be considered and appended to the Statement. It makes it harder for the LEA to ignore it because Panel made their decisions on that evidence. The CoP also says that where there is disagreement beetween reports that the LEA must resolve it and has to explain their reasons for adopting one piece of evidence against another (CoP 8:32).

 

Who is delivering the ABA at the moment? I presume that they are also going to produce a report saying that he needs to continue on this programme?

 

In my own case, I am currently arguing that my independent reports carried out standardised assessments and as the LEA ones do not, mine are the most up to date ones. (But don't use this argument beforehand otherwise they could simply do standardised assessments for the review).

 

You now have the right to appeal any changes that are made to the Statement, or any changes that are not made. ABA is very costly and the LEA may feel it is worth them fighting over this. But you really will not know until you get the proposed Statement.

 

Also, when you submit your parental views ask the LEA to email, or write back and confirm all the documentation you have sent. My LEA did not include my OT report because they said I did not send it to them. However one of their inclusion officers had confirmed by email that they received that same documentation. So, as they refused to admit it because they had not received it, and not because it was out of date, I have asked them to reinstate it. So try to cover every base. Unfortunately my experience is that the whole process is not child centred. I hope you get a better response.

 

Do you have a school in mind for the placement? Is the LEA EP supporting that placement?

Edited November 10, 2010 by Sally44

[Karen A]

Where a child is moving between phases of education such as from primary to

secondary school, the LA must amend the statement to name a new school by

15th February in year of transfer (Code 5.72)

The appropriate placement for secondary school should be considered at the year 5

review. If this is not possible then an early review should be arranged in the autumn

of year 6.

The 15th February deadline also applies to other phase transfers e.g. where LAs

have a middle school system. It does not apply to transfer from nursery to primary

school.

 

Interesting quote about nursery to primary - that's exactly what is happening! That's from the ACE guide isn't it? So that leaves me with more questions than answers

 

Yes.It was from ACE guide page 7.

[Yossarian]

Thanks for all your replies. We're working through this one carefully and are going to take legal advice.

 

I'm a bit wary about posting too many details as I am slightly paranoid about my LA. They are incompetent and devious, and I don't want to give them any help, even inadvertently, through this forum.

 

I am clear this is not an annual review. We were issued with a new statement only weeks ago. Annual reviews go from the date a statement is issued - that is the key date, so even though DS had a previous statement, that date has now fallen away.

Based on the new statement, we are not due one for many months.

 

(I do, though, take the point about there having to be an annual review every year, but that is not what the LA are proposing.)

 

The LA have made clear this is an interim review. My understanding is interim reviews happen every sixth months for a child under 5, or the LA can call one at any time if there are exceptional circumstances: COP

 

9:44 Where a school identifies a pupil with a statement of special educational needs who is at serious risk of disaffection or exclusion, an interim or early review should be called. It will then be possible to consider the pupil’s changing needs and recommend amendments to the statement, as an alternative to the pupil being excluded.68

 

This simply doesn't apply in our case.

 

We won an ABA programme at tribunal which is part home, part nursery based and will continue into school. The only difference will be a change in setting. Same ABA staff will continue to work with DS. There is really nothing else to change.

The LA have not assessed DS for quite some time, but the tribunal decision was recent. If they do try to change DS's statement (again) that would make a mockery of the tribunal's decision.

 

I suspect the LA have other ideas about this, which is why I really need to be clear about what they can and can't do.

 

So I am not clear why the LA can call an interim review. It is not due according to the COP 'timetable'. What we need to do is name a school, in the same way as we would for a child without a statement (I think). Perhaps this is the basis they are calling an interim review? Does there need to be a review to name a school on a statement?

 

So when the LA are looking to 'seek reports', knowing the LA as I do, this is a signal they are going to mess with us. It's not clear to me what basis they can do this. Any more help gratefully received.

[BusyLizzie100]

Hi,I'm not sure about naming a school on transition to primary school.

 

However, I can comment on when a review is due...

 

The process starts from the date of the finalisation of the first statement usually, ie the first annual review takes place at a similar time as the date of the finalised statement (unless there is an interim or early review).

 

However, the actual review itself doesn't take place until after the review meeting, when the LA literally reviews the paperwork and then issues its decree - ie statement to be amended, to stay the same, to be withdrawn etc.

 

Although there is a legal timeframe for the school to get its paperwork to the LA, there's no time limit before which the LA has to make the review, although it should be within a 'reasonable' time. Once this is done, the next review must take place within 12 months of the LA's decision. If a review doesn't take place within that time then it's overdue.

 

Even if a statement has been amended it is the date of the last review that stands, not the date of the amended statement. (For example, my son's statement was finalised in May but amended in November after we appealed; the review was held in the following May.) I believe this is the case unless an amended statement is the result of a statutory re-assessment.

 

Lizzie x

Edited November 10, 2010 by BusyLizzie100

[Kathryn]

Risk of disaffection/exclusion is only one reason for calling an interim review - not the only one. The COP says an interim/early review can be called before a phase transfer if the options weren't clear at the previous review or circumstances have changed. Although the COP mentions this in a year 5/6 context I'm thinking the same principle applies to any transition. (see COP 8:71)

 

The LEA can call an annual review when they like: as long as it's within 12 months of the last. They can call an interim review when they like and they don't need the parents' approval, although they should consult the parents and the school. There are no statutory minimum gaps between reviews.

 

They don't have to call a review to name a school on the statement. However, as your child is young and will be transferring to a new setting, I can't see anything wrong in principle with this, but I fully understand your reasons for being cynical and treading carefully! Have you got a date for the review? It would make more sense to hold it around next February - this term would seem a bit pointless.

 

K x

[Sally44]

My advice would be to seek advice on the legal aspect of what the LEA are doing ie. is it an interim review. Do you have to agree to it. Should they specify the limit of the interim review (ie. placement only) etc.

 

My LEA sought a total re-assessment. I initially refused, but was told by my solicitor that you cannot refuse an LEAs decision to re-assess.

 

So phone IPSEA or SOSSEN or even the solicitor you used previously.

 

If you cannot stop this review, then find out what it will entail. I don't know much about interim reviews, but others do. I don't know if there is the same ability to appeal any decisions made at an interim review.

 

With this interim review submit all your previous reports which were used by Panel to put together the current Statement. If you do have to go to appeal again you can also submit the current Statement as evidence of what your child was previously receiving. The LEA cannot remove things from the Statement without professional reports recommending that. But again, don't tell the LEA that now. Let them produce their reports. For ABA to be removed they would need a professional to recommend that he no longer needs it, or that it is not producing results.

 

So get clued up, but appear dumb.

[Yossarian]

I wanted to say thanks to the people that replied and give you an update.

 

The LA backed down and the review is now going to be 6 months from the date of issue of my son's new statement. He will have gone without an annual or interim review for over a year, and he is under five. I'm not worried about this as we have the provision we want, and any review will be an opportunity for them to try and take it away. I'm aware this flies in the face of the COP but that's not unusual for my LA...