BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 10, 2011 Got a letter this afternoon from DS1's secondary school about consultation on becoming an academy. The school obviously thinks it's a good idea but are consulting parents also. I'm really anti the whole idea. DS1 has AS, is in Year 8, has had a Statement since the end of Year 6 and the secondary school STILL hasn't put the required provision in place, despite all sorts of meetings and annual reviews. We are currently waiting for the outcome of the most recent review, in which we have said that unless the provision in put in place ASAP we will take further action, eg judicial review. So if the school can't do it with the LA behind them, ie supposedly enforcing the Statement, how the heck are they going to do it on their own???? There'll be absolutely no one to kick them up the backside and make them do it - especially since they have chosen to ignore all the professionals' advice and 'do their own thing'. The consultation period ends 3 Feb and parents can meet governors in person to discuss particular issues on the eve of 20 Jan. Except I can't make it because I have no child care, having three children on the spectrum and a husband who works evenings. They don't make it easy, do they. Lizzie Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sally44 Report post Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) Regarding becoming an academy, all you can do is put your views. What the school decides to do after that is up to them. Regarding the Statement, I just wanted to say not to give them too long before you start judicial process proceedings (if that is what you intend to do). When I did the same thing the LEA came back with a decision to re-assess the whole Statement. They threw out everything they were not providing in the original statement and weakened any provision still remaining in the Statement eg "xxx will receive an emotional literacy programme which will aim to teach him to recognise his own emotions and the emotions in others" was changed to "xxx will receive support when emotionally disregulated". Once they start the re-assessment process you cannot use Judicial Review. Although you would still have the right of appeal to any new Statement; if they do totally re-assess you will find that any independent reports you initially used are now out of date and the cost to get them replaced is much greater than the judicial review process. Edited January 11, 2011 by Sally44 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 11, 2011 Thanks, Sally. My main issue is that it is the LA's own professionals that school is choosing to ignore. That includes the LA's senior educational psychologist and head of the autism advisory service, who are all saying that the provision in PArt 3 is non-negotiable and has to be put in place. To date the LA has kept quiet, although it was their suggestion to hold an Early Annual Review. As I said, we're just waiting to see if the LA actually fulfils its role in making sure the provision is put in place (this is their last chance!) If the school becomes an academy, however, the 'security' of having the LA there to ensure the provision is in place, as per the law, is taken away. With no one to regulate the academy, it could do what it likes with regard to SEN... yes, I want plenty of reassurances!! Ostensibly the next stage if the LA is taken out of the equation is the Secretary of State for education - how likely is he to look at individual cases????!!!! Bah humbug. Lizzie x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sally44 Report post Posted January 12, 2011 Yes, I agree that an academy will weaken your position. But, if the LA do get an Early Review and the school recommends your child does not need the support itemised in the Statement, the LA may decide to 'change' the Statement to remove that provision. Although you have the right of appeal, you would need to prove your case for it to be reinstated and again if your reports are over a year old you are on poor ground. Judicial Review now is a better option. You can always start the process and if the LA suddenly provides the provision you simply withdraw your application. But as long as you do nothing there is nothing to motivate the LA to comply with the Statement. Hasn't this been going on for months already? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 12, 2011 Hasn't this been going on for months already? Yes. The review meeting was held in November; I'm waiting for the LA to complete the Review process. The time period for that to be completed is not bound by law - apart from that the annual review must take place within 12 months of the previous one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sally44 Report post Posted January 13, 2011 In that case, you might get the outcome you want by starting judicial review. That would focus the LEAs attention immediately and would stop them calling an interim review in any attempt to alter the Statement and weaken any of the current issues of non-compliance. And if the judicial review enforces all that the Statement contains, then it will be much harder for the school to then withdraw it. Have you spoken to Ipsea about the specifics of what is not being provided and whether to start judicial review proceedings? If the review was in November and nothing has happened so far, then I cannot see that anything other than the above causing them to fulfill their duties and legal responsibilities. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jollypig Report post Posted January 13, 2011 the worst possible outcome for any child with sen is for their school to become an academy. dd was in her second year when it happened to us her issues were well documented but a change of senco meant that as she didnt agree with some things [funnily enough it was the things where she actually had to do something to support dd ]we had a fight to get even the most basic of support even though we were almost through the statment process. A lot of experienced staff left at the same time as it became an academy, because of the lack of support i withdrew my dd as even with parent partnership involvment they failed to action the most basic things they had agreed to do at various meetings. dd is now in a special school and is thriving , i have heard that the academy has become very strict and has even put a girl in seclusion for having her hair cut too short! As said previously once its an academy there is little the LA can do to assist with any problems. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sally44 Report post Posted January 13, 2011 Whether or not academies are bad news for children with SEN has to be kept separate from the issue of the Statement. That is because IF the school does become an academy and the Statement is not complied with, then you need a well worded Statement to be able to challenge any non-compliance issues however difficult that process maybe with an academy. Therefore, whatever the placement, you have to ensure the Statement is complied with. If that does not happen you challenge the school and/or LEA. In some circumstances that may involve a change of school, and again the current Statement will move with the child to any new school and therefore will be the best indicator of the kind of school placement and provision needed. The longer a Statement is not complied with the greater the chance that the school/LEA will turn round and say that the child has coped without the support anyway. That gives them the chance to amend the Statement to remove the provision not being provided. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 14, 2011 DS1 does have a well-worded statement, I wrote it for the appeal to SEND. There isn't a problem with that. His needs are well identified and the provision is good. The problem is that to date school has chosen to ignore the statement. In its arrogance, it feels it knows better than all the contributing professionals, none of whom are independent/private. The professionals have found themselves in a strange situation, going to meetings with school to support and help them understand and being faced with accusations of 'you're wrong'. So even before any change of status to academy, I feel like I've had a bit of a taste of what could come!! And as regards moving him to a different school, that too is tricky because almost all secondaries in our area are considering becoming academies... Lizzie Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted January 15, 2011 Aargh Lizzie are they really going down that route? O's school is making noises about it too although they haven't quite reached the consultation stage yet. Can you submit questions to them in writing? Maintained schools have legal obligations to all pupils with SEN under the Education Act 1996. The problem with Academies is that they are not automatically bound by the same legal obligations - in this respect they function like independent schools. This means, for example, that they do not have to follow the SEN Code of Practice. However, the more recent academies and certainly all those post 2010, have to have these SEN obligations specifically written into their funding agreement with the Secretary of State, and so there is better protection for pupils with SEN, at least on paper. There is, however a less clear cut way of complaining if there is a problem: you can't complain to the LEA or Ombudsman as you would for a maintained school. Complaints about academies are now dealt with by the YPLA (Young People's Learning Agency)This appears to be a well kept secret so far! Recently the YPLA has published an official complaints procedure for parents who have exhausted the internal school procedure so at least there is something to follow. (difficult to find - I'll try and post a link on the forum for anyone who wants to see it).The YPLA are acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, with regard to academies - i.e. as far as I understand you can't complain to the YPLA and then the S of S - it's effectively the same thing. Will pm you Lizzie K x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sally44 Report post Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) I've recently queried a case law decision quoted to me by my LEA with IPSEA. I thought it was relevent to your situation. The case law quoted was that parents had sought Judicial Review about aspects of the SALT programme that their daughter was not receiving. The Judge found in favour of the LEA and said that the whole statement should be looked at rather than the consituent parts. The parents appealed this decision and won. This is what IPSEA says about that decision and on the obligation of any LEA to provide ALL of the provision detailed in a Statement. "N sought to compel delivery of the SALT in her Statement by judicial review. The Administrative Court refused to compel delivery. The Court of Appeal held that to be wrong. The obligation under the Education Act 1996 s.324(5) on an LEA to arrange the Special Educational Provision specified in a statement of Special Educational Needs was absolute. It was not merely a best endeavours obligation which was satisfied where the LEA had arranged most of the elements of Part 3 of the Statement and considered that the child did not require the others (despite the Tribunal having decided to the contrary). A provision in a Statement which purported to allow an LEA to change provision without amending the statement was unlawful." So if your child's Statement is not being complied with, the above is the most up to date case law. Edited January 20, 2011 by Sally44 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 20, 2011 I have a meeting with the head tomorrow (Friday) morning! Have never met him before, Heads seem to be quite mysterious and elusive at secondary school... Anyway, any ideas on what to ask would be gratefully received!! And of course I'll let you know how I get on... Lizzie x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Keep them fairly open ended, I would, and his answers may give rise to more questions. Just off the top of my head: What changes will Academy status bring to the school overall? How will Academy status directly affect pupils with SEN? How much increased funding will be set aside for SEN and how will the school use it? How will the school be governed? How will governors be appointed? How many will be parents? What will be the relationship between the school and the LEA? How will the school obtain services currently provided by the LEA, (EP AAS etc)? If the school's contract is with the Secretary of State, not the LEA, will it still have an obligation to provide what is in part 3 of the statement? What happens if the school decides it can't/won't? (answer - there is no legal obligation to provide what is in part 3 written into funding agreements - evn the newer ones, so this is a potential problem. LEA's do not have direct control over Academies to ensure statements are enforced.) Will the complaints policy be revised to include the role of the YPLA? These are questions which probably concern you most as the parent of a child with SEN but you may want to ask about other issues, like changes to exclusion and admissions policies. Good luck. Will you be taking lots of notes? Let us know how you get on: those of us whose schools may be going this way will be interested to hear! K x Edited January 20, 2011 by Kathryn Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 21, 2011 Brilliant! Thanks, Kathryn. Will report back! L x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted January 21, 2011 Well we had a good meeting - school is currently investing in the SEN department so that is reassuring in itself. However the Head said he assumed that the LA would continue to have authority over SEN matters if the school became an academy. My understanding is that this is NOT the case - an academy has a contract with the DofE, not the LA, in fact the LA is out of the equation altogether. To his credit he said he'll look into it and get back to us - this is still the consultation stage, after all. Unless, of course, it is written into the Funding Agreement that the LA maintains authority... Will keep an eye on this. L x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
