How many hours one to one support

[LisaKaz75]

Leo is 3 and currently at preschool. He attends 15 hours a week and at the moment the preschool gets funding for one to one support for all 15 hours

 

We are currently going through the statement process, requested by LEA (due to the fact he gets 15 hours) Next school year, he is still at preschool and been assured that the 15 hours will stand

 

How many hours can we expect for him for primary school. The view at this stage is that he will attend a main stream school, with plenty of one to one support. This has been backed by us, Ed psych, current SENCO

 

Is it likely he will get all his hours. Will the support just be for educational stuff, or for the none educational support he needs too?

 

How many hours does your child receive?

 

LisaKaz

[RainbowsButterflies]

I used to work as a 1 to 1 support assistant for a little boy in reception with HFA. He had 25 hours which was 10-3 every day including playtimes and lunchtime, as he needed the support outside the classroom as much if not more than in it.

[Kathryn]

Hi LisaKaz,

 

Difficult to say without knowing your situation and how SEN funding works in your LA. If there is clear evidence of a need for more than 15 hrs and up to full time support (about 32 hrs) this shoould be set out in the statement as special educational provision. The LA may decide to specify just 15 hrs support in the statement and expect the school to fund any extra from their own budget but a Statement should set out all the extra support a child needs so you could challenge that, with the backing of professionals.

 

A statement is to support educational needs but this means "educational" in the wider sense, and this can include social, behavioural and physical development, not just the formal academic teaching that goes on in the classroom. As Rainbow's example shows, a child may specifically need 1-1 support at unstructured playtimes: developing play and communication skills is a vital part of education. If your son especially needs this kind of support it's adviseable to get it explicitly written into the statement to make sure it happens.

 

Talk to the head of the primary you're looking at: he/she may be able to give you a good idea of the level of support which would be appropriate to go for.

 

K x

[Sally44]

If reports have been done what do they say?

You can ask the EP and SALT to quantify input if they haven't done that. You can speak to them and always follow it up with a written letter about what you discussed and what was agreed.

Unstructured freetime (dinnertimes and playtimes) are known to be even more stressful than structured learning. And I think the NAS.org has booklets about that.

The SALT should know what his social communication and interaction/playskills are like (as should the current nursery). Do they have to support him during these times too? If so all those hours should be included, otherwise he could get into a state during breaktimes and not be in a calm state ready to learn in lessons.

[Aine]

My son gets five hours a week. Which is better than the 'none at all' that we were originally told to expect, I suppose.

 

I hope you get what you need.

[oxgirl]

I'd like to just add a small note of caution, if I may, in that I don't think full-time 1:1 is always a positive thing.

 

My lad is nearly 18 now and he always had full-time 1:1, both while he was in mainstream primary and also while he was at his secondary ASD unit. Looking back, I think it was quite a negative thing, actually, because he did become so very dependant on having an adult with him 24 hours day that it actually prevented him from developing his own ideas and his own will. He, in a sense, ended up being quite institutionalized and unable to function as an individual.

 

Whilst he was at primary, he began to spend less and less time in the class with the other children and more and more on his own with his 1:1 helper and this really wasn't a good thing for him. Of course, children who need extra support should receive it, but I would just like to say that, looking back, full-time 1:1 with an adult was not a positive thing for us at all.

 

I suppose it does depend on the helper involved and whether or not they know when to step back and give the child some space to actually grow and integrate as much as they can without continually being stuck to their side and continually intervening to the extent of interferring and actually preventing the child from thinking for themselves and working things out for themselves. It really did hold my son back. I am left with a nearly 18 year old who is unable to think for hiself and is still totally reliant on an adult to tell him what to do and to escort him there. Now, of course, that might have happened anyway, but I do think he could have grown more independant if he was given the chance to try for himself without an adult continually bailing him out and speaking for him but we were not to know that at the time, we thought we were doing the best for him.

 

It was also a massive barrier to him making friends, especially at secondary school, he never made a single friend all the time he was at school. He was escorted into lessons with his TA, who sat with him. I'm very torn, because at the time it was deemed necessary, but it made it impossible for other children to get near him or approach him in any way and he was totally separate from the rest of the class, it was him and his TA in their own little world.

 

Don't mean to upset or put anyone off, just wanted people with very young children to think about it from the other side too whilst they're embarking on their school journey.

 

Good luck to all. <'>

 

~ Mel ~

[Grace]

Hi,

 

Another alternative to full-time one to one at mainstream is attending a special school. There, because the environment is set-up for special needs and there are fewer children with more staff, it can allow more independence in the school itself. Also in the early years, specialist input can really help to bring a child on.

 

The LA might not suggest this to you, but I would recommend at least going and having a look at any schools in your geographical area. It might be that your LA do not have any suitable special schools, but you can look at any in neighbouring authorities. Just ring the schools directly to organise a look round.

 

Transport can be provided to these schools (guidelines suggest a max journey of 45 mins for primary age children)and don't be put off by people saying there are no places. If you decide you do want to go with special school, and you meet any resistance, come back on the forum for further info.

 

My DS was in mainstream with full-time help at one point and got 32.5 hours one to one, including breaks and lunchtime.

 

Best Wishes

 

Grace/x

Edited April 30, 2011 by Grace

[LisaKaz75]

thanka all for you responses

 

Leo has been awarded 15 hours next year as still in preschool and then 32.5 (full time) hours in primary school

 

we and ed psych have chosen main stream school as a preferred option as Leo learns a lot by repetition and the school here are very varied for special needs, and there are concerns that Leo could learn worse behaviour / language there

 

I agree about having all one to one, however it is specified that the one to one support must give Leo space to work with his peers, encourage Leo to interact with them and also them to interact with him. The statment specifies education and non education support

At the school that we have chosen for Leo, all children have regular one to one time, so Leo would not seem different than the nor,. what has been suggested is that Leo will need some addtional help with what is going to happen next

 

Initially, we are pleased with what has been suggested, as I feel initially there will be trial and error. Perhaps a special schoolo would be better, perhaps a different mainstream school?? but our initial meetings, visits of school and staff suggest that this is the best place to start

 

Thanks all

 

LisaKaz x

[Yossarian]

Hi Lisa

 

Well done on getting this far.

 

Just wanted to check - a lot of statements issued can be quite vague. You need to watch out for phrases like "will have access to" and "up to" etc. If Leo needs speech and language therapy it should be in part 3, not part 6. It is not legally enforceable in part 6. Statements that are vague cannot be enforced, so having everything nailed down at the start is advisable (ie quantified and specified) Can you check the exact wording and let us know what it says?

[Sally44]

I agree with Yossarian - make sure it is legally enforceable.

 

I found with my son's Statement was that although the Statement said "xxxx will need access to adult support during playtimes to extend social interaction skills into this environment" - The schools interpretation of what that meant was not what it was supposed to mean. Because of how it was worded it was not specific enough and could not be enforced.

 

I thought it meant that my son would be taught social skills (whatever form that might take eg. rote learnt scripts etc), and that once those skills had been taught in 1:1 sessions with the SALT, or TA, or in the SULP group, that there would then be a planned progression for an adult to support my son to use those same skills in the playground until he was using them unprompted and independently. I didn't expect he would get continual 1:1 adult support. But I did expect that skills would be explictly taught and generalised into other environments - that is what the report said he needed.

 

That never happened. What the above paragraph actually meant was that the school were required to make sure there was an adult on the playground. There are adults on every mainstream primary playground in the country. That paragraph did not provide anything extra for my son at all. He has not had any 'specific' support for any speech and language or social communication skills and has not made progress in this area at all. So be VERY careful about what a Statement actually provides. LEAs are clever and know how to word Statements so that they don't have to provide anything. Unfortunate, but true.

 

What it should have said was something like "speech and language and social interaction skills will be prioritised by the SALT and taught explictly in 1:1 discreet sessions as per the written SALT programme. When those targets have been achieved in those discreet sessions XXXX will be supported 1:1 by a TA (who has been trained by the SALT) who will explicitly teach those skills to xxxx using a dedicated amount of time which will be agreed between the school/SALT and parents and agreed at MEP meetings. This adult support will be gradually reduced as xxxx demonstrates that he can independently use these skills in other environments. Skills must be generalised from discreet sessions into the classroom and playground. This will be identified as a target on his termly MEP and progress will be monitored by the SALT."

 

For each professional eg. SALT, the Statement MUST detail the amount of termly hours she will spend on speech and language AND SOCIAL COMMUNICATION. My son's Statement details 7 hours per term for therapy and 5 hours per term for admin, training, liaison with parents/school, attending and liaising wit the Multi Agency Team, note taking, observations and assessments, attending MEPs and Annual Review and writing up to date yearly report for the Annual Review.

 

The reason you need quantified hours is because - as an example - if your child does not make progress with 15 hours SALT support per term, that is your argument that he needs either more SALT hours or a more specialist learning environment. If you have no idea how many hours are being allocated to your child you have no idea if input is increased or reduced and you don't know what level of input he needs to make progress.

[LisaKaz75]

thabks for the advice and have gone through and can see gaps and sonme things need to be more specified in part 3! so thanks for that!

 

However, as Leo does not start school till September 2012, it is making it so difficult to specify. The change in him in the last 4 moths since he started getting 15 hours support at nursery is huge, and I can not see how we can be that specific in hours when in hoensty we dont know yet?

 

Any suggestions?

[Yossarian]

Hi Lisa

 

It isn't really down to you to say what Leo needs. That is purpose the statutory assessment process. The local authority asks the experts - ed psych, SALT, outreach service, paediatrician, social services etc for their assessments, which will become the appendices to Leo's statement. The local authority SEN officer will then use those assessments to write the statement. The problems that can follow can be due to the experts not quantifying or specifying provision - something which they are allowed to do, but often don't because they are 'fettered'. The larger structural reason for this is that the local authority both assesses and pays for provision- so the employees are not independent when it comes to assessing a child's need - eg the EP knows what provision the LA has made for children with autism, and will only recommend that provision - not what the child actually needs. In case you are wondering LAs and SALT departments stitch these things up between themselves. SALT don't have the resources to give a child the SALT they usually need - many don't even offer any direct speech therapy at all- and so it is in their interest to go along with the LA.

 

Whether you realise this or not, you are experiencing that already. Leo gets 15 hours of 1:1 support at nursery. Coincidentally that happens to be exactly how many hours children aged three can get funded at nursery under the free places scheme - I can't remember the exact name of it right now. Why does Leo need only 15 hours of 1:1 support - why not 20 or 30? Why not a home programme? (eg that is set out in ASD Good Practice Guidance). Why is it that Leo only needs 15 hours now, but will need 32.5 hours at school? Doesn't he need 32.5 hours now? The local authority is fitting Leo into the provision they offer pre-school children, rather than giving Leo what he needs. (I say this knowing very little about Leo, but the same thing happens all the time and the coincidence is too big.)

 

If the LA write in the proposed statement "Leo needs access to 15 hours TA support" you can do one of two things:

 

1 push to have this specified properly, as Sally says, to eg"Leo needs 15 hours 1:1 TA support, by a TA qualified and experienced in autism " or

 

2 if you do not think this is adequate ie you can demonstrate that Leo has not made appropriate progress, then you would have to appeal the statement to the SEND tribunal. That takes you into another realm of getting independent expert(s) to assess Leo eg Ed Psych

 

A standard next step is to contact IPSEA, NAS Education helpline, ACE, or SOSSEN and get them to look over the statement and give you their opinion. The helplines can be very busy but worth getting a sore finger for.

[Sally44]

Exactly.

 

SO why 15 now and 32.5 next year?

 

And the quantified hours 1:1 support does not include therapies.

 

So the SALT, OT and EP input should also be quantified on top of those hours and it should detail what they are going to use those hours for. And the wording needs to be precise. If the Statement uses words like "opportunities for" "regular input" "often" "significantly more" "access to" "as required" "when necessary" - these are all words that mean the LEA can do nothing and you can do nothing to challenge that because the wording is too wishy washy. It should say xxxx WILL receive xx hours per term direct 1:1 therapy from a suitably qualified SALT to be delivered in school etc.

[LisaKaz75]

thanks again

 

Ed psych, SALT all involved and are in appendix. They are surprised that they are mentioned in part 2 but not mentioned in part 3. Getting this resolved

Also picking through appendices as ed psych mentioned danger awareness and Leo trying to run off (thinks its a game!) this has not been specifically mentioned in part 3 and I think it ought to be

Getting some help from childrens centre and lady who used to be a teacher who is now on the other side (as it were) on Friday and this gives time to contact LEA with the things that need adding

As I say the things are all mentioned in part 2 and the many appendices, but are missing in the legal bit in part 3

 

thanks again

 

LisaKaz

[Yossarian]

Hi Lisa

 

You sound like you are on the ball - part two should set out Leo's needs - that's all of them - and then part three should set out how those needs are going to be met. If anything is missing in part two or three now is the time to jump up and down about it. Have you read the Code of Practice? It sets out what should happen here

[Sally44]

If you are unsure about the Statement being legal you can always put in an appeal when the LEA finalise the Statement. This would mean you were in the process for an appeal hearing if you needed it and lets the LEA know you mean business. At any time running up to the actual appeal - and sometimes even on the day itself - the LEA may decide to agree to everything you are asking for.

If you have any doubts at all it is worth going to appeal with the reports and information/evidence you have and letting the Tribunal Panel see the documentation and let them decide how to word the Statement. You have nothing to lose, but the LEA does because provision that is quantified and specified costs them money.

Just don't feel intimidated and seek advice and help from organisations known to have expertise in this area such as The National Autistic Society, IPSEA, Network81 etc.