Statement - Provision

[Andy]

I am probably sating something that is widely known on these forums but am just seeking some advice and clarity.

 

Over the past 18 months i get the feeling that skilled SaLT is being withdrawn from statement provision.

 

I haven't become aware of any published evidence that this is the case, but the last time we met with a Qualified SaL therapist was about 12 months ago as DS's school (autism centre) who told us that he would no longer be servicing the school, or county, and he would not be replaced. He seemed embarressed by the situation, mentioned funding but wouldn't comment further.

 

DS has some real issues with S&L and we were keen to get the provision addressed at our annual review in a few weeks time.

 

We have just recieved a letter from county that says DS was observed by SaLT (once over the past 4 months) and the letter goes on to detail the need for DS to have continued support in this area becuase of his difficulties. Her letter goes on to say, that she will talk to the school TA (who has no current experience with SaLT) and advise her what works needs to be done with DS.

 

Is this acceptable? DS will be 8 this year, and only me and wife really understand what he is saying. Family have to ask us 'What did he say?" all the time. He has food, texture and swallowing issues, and a gruff voice that the Pead, did have concerns of damage to vocal chords.

 

I get really angry with the backhanded methods county use to confuse parents and carer's. I also have sympathy with the school teahcers and TA's that have to be the middlemen, in this, and take the anger of the parents and cares that feel unsupported and let down.

 

 

 

It's really hard trying to work your way through the various education and SEN terminology and the various opportunities to challenge the various decisons. It's disheartening to think you can work your butt off, esatblishing a real need for support only to find that the provision may not even exist in the way you think it might.

 

I know this seems like the tip of the iceberg to what some of you have been though, and i have the utmost respect for those of you that had the strength and drive to decipher the jargon, and fight for your entitlements.

 

 

One last point. we have our annual statement review in a few weeks, will there still be a poposed statement on the back of this, or because DS alreay had a stement will the review meeting go on to simply generate a final statement.

What i am trying to say, is the first time a child is statemented, the only time a proposed statement is generated, or our proposals generated on the back of each annual review?

 

EDIT* Just found this on the web, which seems in nationwide, really sad news

http://www.vernon-coaker-mp.co.uk/cuts-to-speech-and-language-therapy-services-leave-an-autistic-s

Edited January 7, 2012 by Andy

[Sally44]

The first thing you need to understand is the legal SEN law trumps local authority or school criteria.

 

So whatever the school or LA say they do not have or cannot do is irrelevant if you have a report that states your son has x, y and z needs which MUST be met by xx hours of 1:1 therapy per term from a qualified SALT, with xx hours for all admin ie. observations, training, liaising, attending IEPs and Annual Reviews etc.

 

The SALT input MUST also include social communication, emotional literacy, relationships/play skills etc that DO come under the SALT remit.

 

When a local authorities cuts or stops a budget eg. SALT, that means that those children who do NOT have that input specified in their child's Statement lose out.

 

If the provision is quantified and specified in the Statement by LA is legally responsible to provide it, ie. buy it in. And if they don't you can use Judicial Review which would make a legal Order/Decision that would force the LA to provide it.

 

So your main issue is to get a good SALT report.

 

You may not achieve that with the NHS SALT because you are asking them to quantify the provision they then have to fund, and they may not have that in their budget and all the SALTs will know what they can/cannot specify as per internal training/communications etc.

 

So you will most likely need an independent SALT who has experience of writing reports for tribunals, and also attending as expert witness. Their reports are not cheap. But at a Tribunal the Panel will look at what has been recommended and there would be some discussion amongst the Panel, LA SALT and your Independent SALT and the Panel would make a decision and recommend the provision your child needs to meet the needs identified.

 

After your Annual Review the LA will decide whether to amend the current Statement or not.

 

New SEN law states that parents can now appeal after an Annual Review whether the LA amend or not. And you can appeal for any part of the Statement [ie. parts 2, 3 and 4].

 

IF it is true that the LA will not have access to any SALT provision, I think that is worthwhile you getting that information for any possible tribunal you attend. But don't seek that information until after the Annual Review.

 

Write to the Head of the SALT department and ask them to detail what provision they provide to your son's current school.

Ask them when they last assessed your child. Ask them to confirm that they will no longer be providing any SALT input to your son. [You are asking this to ascertain that the school/LA do not have access to SALT input, and therefore IF your child needs SALT input the LA would have to buy it in].

 

Then write to your sons current school and ask them what additional qualifications and training their staff have for ASD and Speech and Communication difficulties and Disorders. [You are asking this to ascertain if the school has that expertise/qualification within the school staff - because if they don't, this school can be proven to be unsuitable for your child and/or the LA has to buy in the qualified staff/SALT professionals to meet his needs].

 

Look around at other schools and see IF there is one that is able to meet your son's needs. Ask your LA for their list of maintained, special, approved and independent schools suitable for teaching children with an ASD and Speech and Communication Disorder. Then go and visit each one.

 

After the AR, when you are told whether the Statement will be amended or not, you put in an Appeal.

 

You have your son assessed privately if you can and you submit their report within the deadline for submitting evidence. You also submit your letters and the responses you received. And you go to the Tribunal. You have nothing to lose even if you can't afford any report.

 

You can video your son and send that in as evidence of his day to day speech and language difficulties. Again submit it within the deadline.

 

The Tribunal Panel have to read/view DVD's etc. And they WILL ask some very searching questions of the school/LA.

 

How it should go is that your son has had xx hours of input from a SALT. Has he made progress with this amount of input, or does he need more. Have all his needs been identified and met.

 

If a reducation is being recommended there must be evidence of improvement to such an extent that that provision can be removed. They have not provided that. They are not claiming he no longer needs it. They are saying it is no longer available. That is irrelevent in SEN legal law. The Panel will simply Order the LA to provide it, unless the NHS SALT attends the Tribunal and states he no longer needs it, and she would need evidence of that improvement via assessment results, IEP targets being met etc.

 

After my son's last AR, the SALT recommended a reduction in the overall hours of input. I wrote to her and asked her to detail exactly how much time she had spent on 1:1 therapy and admin over the last academic year. She responded saying "I have spent significantly more time working with xxxx than is detailed in his Statement." And she detailed all her input, which was about double what was in the Statement. Yet she had recommended a reduction in hours. That was bizarre. A Statement is supposed to be a TRUE REFLECTION of the child's needs and how much support/therapy is needed to meet each and every need.

 

So we included that in our Appeal. I instructed an independent SALT and she came with us as an expert witness. The Panel found in favour of our SALT who stated that it must be a suitably qualified SALT delivering his 1:1 sessions and also a SALT delivering the social communication aspect of his therapy. He also needed SALT support during breaktimes and in the classroom. This is now all detailed in his Statement.

 

Because of the severity of his difficulties, and the amount of therapy he needs, we were able to prove that he needed to be placed in an independent ASD specific school. The Panel found in our favour.

 

It is easier to win an independent school placement at transfer to secondary school ie. at the year 6 AR. However as our son was already out of school for nearly a year we sought an immediate move for year 6, as we could demonstrate that there was no possibility that he would return to his former primary school.

 

So think about where you want your child to be placed for secondary school and decide IF that is the best time to use all your resources to get him there.

 

For the forseeable you could get an independent SALT report and go to Tribunal with that and see what the Panel decides. That report will give you a baseline from which to measure progress from, and hopefully it will get you the SALT input he needs.

 

Then decide to go to Tribunal again when he is in year 6 after the Transfer Annual Review.

 

Basically, if you have written evidence of the amount of SALT input your son needs, then go to Tribunal.

Or if you have a letter that states SALT provision is stopping, then go to Tribunal and see if the Panel will reinstate it.

 

But remember the LA will take their expert witnesses with them ie. SALT and maybe EP and the school SENCO who may all state that your son is making good progress with the provision he currently receives. So you need evidence that that is not true.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Sally44

[Andy]

Many thanks Sally. I will make contact with the SaLT you mentioned in your PM and try and build my case from there.

 

Thank you

 

Andy