Year 5 Annual Review - Secondary placement- professionals being evasive

[Athena]

The Code of Practice clearly states that professionals should be able to make clear recommendations regarding suitable placement at the Year 5 Annual review.

At the moment, while they are all asking ME what my views are on secondary placement, they are all being very evasive and NOT making any recommendations, contrary to what they are required to do.

The CoP states:

5:69 All concerned with the child should give careful thought to transfer between phases. Advance planning is essential. The move should initially be considered at the review meeting prior to the last year in the current school. Thus consideration of transfer from primary to secondary education would need initial consideration at the review in year

 

5:70 At the review in year 5 it should be possible, in most cases, to give clear recommendations as to the type of provision the child will require at the secondary stage.

 

I am still waiting for the Ed Psych report and the SALT has told me that as she comes under Health, she is not allowed make any comments on school placement - I'm sure this isn't right, but can't find anything in law to support my view.

[justine1]

Sorry don't have much advice but going through the same at the moment. I believe it is only in April that we have to make a choice on whic schools so have a few months left. However I was lucky enough to have his usual annual review last week and we were able to discuss options, which I believe we will discuss more at the review in March as by then the ed psych report should be in.To be honest they were not that clear either but I do believe they do not wish to sway me in a different direction as it could lead to me blaming them when it goes pear shaped.

 

They have said,which may be the same for you,that we should look at ALL schools including those which I do not think are suitable(we have a mainstream just 5min walk away) as if it is a catchment school they may insist he goes there,apparently it has happened in the past. So when looking at schools try not to look at the positives but mostly the negatives that way you can say why that school is really not suitable.

 

Not sure about the SALT as my son is at a unit so the SALT is provided through the school we get two reports from her every year so it should cover for when we chose a school.Good luck it is so stressful.

[Sally44]

I think they have their hands tied regarding naming an actual placement.

 

But what I did was to write to each of them to ask them to assess using standardised assessments, and to identify each and every need for part 2, with provision quantified and specified to meet each of those needs in terms of hours of support, staffing arrangements, hours of therapy input and specific therapy required. Then I quoted the above section from the SEN Code of practice. Because parts 2 and 3 of the Statement should add up to give a very clear idea of the 'provision' the child needs.

 

If you are thinking of special or independent school you already know what kind of things they need to specify:-

 

Class size

Any specialist teaching or teaching approach.

Therapy in termly hours and how it should be delivered as per the weekly timetable and by WHOM.

Any specialist therapy NOT automaticaly provided in schools or by the NHS ie. 1:1 OT Sensory Integration therapy or therapy for Dyspraxia both delivered by a suitably qualified OT.

Specialist teaching for Dyslexia by the specialist teacher.

Being in a school with similar peer group.

 

And you also base alot of that on THE PROGRESS she has made during this final year. Has the support been enough. Has the gap widened?

 

I also sent a copy of their own professional colleges guidance on certain issues. Eg. There is guidance I can send you regarding the SALT professional body giving advice on what reports for Tribunals should contain - not quite the same as a Transfer review. But it clearly says that provision should be specified to meet the child's needs, and not the resources of the SALT department.

[Athena]

Justine, thank you we are in mainstream primary but we want a special school for secondary.

Sally, thank you, that is just the sort of advice that I need!

The SALT is wanting to discharge, giving the reason that DD has ASD as the reason why, SALT is arguing that she will make little further progress with social communication due to her ASD, which is something that was refuted by the Panel when we went to Tribunal, who awarded WEEKLY 1:1 SALT, which has really benefited DD and it is clear to see that she can and has made great progress with her social communication skills, due to the input from SALT, including social skills groups at school.

[Sally44]

That is a bizarre position for the SALT to take. So no input because no expected progress?!?!

 

The argument actually goes the other way ie. with xx hours of 1:1 SALT therapy your daughter has not made progress, therefore she needs to be in a placement where there is SALT on site, and where her therapy can be delivered not only in 1:1 sessions with the SALT, but also in group sessions with 'similar peers', and where the SALT and teacher work together to jointly deliver the therapy across the curriculum ie. her 'lessons', will also include SALT approaches and targets.

 

But to get the above in a report, it will probably have to be a private one - and again someone with alot of experience of writing reports for tribunals.

 

But lack of progress is ALWAYS what the Tribunal Panel are looking for.

 

My SALT recommended a reduction from 15 hours per term to 12. She said his scores were in the 'average' range. She said his therapy no longer needed to be delivered by a SALT, and that there needed to be no hours specified for 'therapy' and 'admin'. So the 12 hours could have been 11.5 hours admin and .5 hours therapy is she decided.

 

So I wrote to the SALT and I asked her to detail exactly how much time in the last academic year she had spent on 1:1 therapy and on admin. [if you have this detailed in the current Statement you can check with the SALT that that is the amount of therapy your daughter received].

 

The SALT emailed me back saying she had spent "significantly more time" on my son than was detailed in his Statement. Also my independent report [and the NHS report], showed that although he had some areas that were around average, he had other scores that were advanced [but that was due to being able to repeat verbatim the story read to him - his understanding was not assessed]. And on some standardised assessment scores he had fallen further behind [ie. lack of progress/gap has widened] - which the NHS SALT tried to fob me off with "but he is a year older". That makes no difference. Children make progress in line with their age, if they don't they are falling further behind.

 

On some specific subtests [i think it was Celf 4 Formulated Sentences], he scored a 2, where 3 is classed as severe. And on questioning the SALT, forumlated sentences gives a good indication of how the child will perform in the classroom. This assessment gives the child a single word and they have to form a sentence to include that word. My son really struggled to do this.

 

Anyway, at the Tribunal I stated that the Statement is supposed to be a true reflection of need and the provision required to meet those needs. By the SALT recommending a reduction of hours of input eventhough she admitted she had to use more hours to meet his needs - and having assessed him and found he had fallen further behind and had severe/profound difficulties in some areas - and as social communication becomes a greater part of interaction as children grow up - I said he actually needed the input as per my independent report. And more importantly that the SALT needed to be employed on site to work with the teaching and other therapy team to deliver a cohesive, jointly planned programme of education and therapy across his daily curriculum in school.

 

But also consider OT, because IF your child has a Sensory processing Disorder their needs cannot be met in any LA mainstream or special school because the NHS does not fund Sensory Integration Therapy. So you need that in writing from the OT service, and you need an independent OT report stating she needs this therapy and again that it must be delivered by an OT employed on site so that the programme can be delivered flexibly across the week.

 

Children with higher levels of need must have the therapy staff on site because the teaching and therapy team need to be able to be flexible across the day and day to day. If my son needs an extra break in the Sensory Room he can have it. If he refuses to engage with OT on Monday, she can fit him in again on Wednesday. The OT can work with him in class, PE and swimming lessons and give advice and equipment to staff. If he has had a bad night, I can phone school and EVERYONE will be aware and make sure he does not have a bad day in school - as far as that is possible. By acting immediately, it reduces his anxiety and has stopped his school refusal. In mainstream or even a special school, the child would have to be referred, and that can take months, or never even happen if an OT is not available.

 

Are you looking at an LA special school or an independent one?

[Sally44]

If she has made progress with SALT that means it has been beneficial. So highlight the progress, as well as any areas she has not made progress or has fallen further behind.

Does she attend a social communication group at all? If not you could suggest that as she is getting older there is a need for her to have some therapy in a group setting, and that she would need to be in a similar peer group.

 

Yes she has an ASD, and that means she will always have difficulties in the triad of impairments, but that does not mean she cannot make progress. She needs to reach her potential to be as independent as possible and to be a productive member of society.

Edited October 25, 2012 by Sally44

[Athena]

Sally, thank you, you have put it much better than I could have done! She has made progress, but only because of very intensive SALT awarded by Tribunal, but ever since then, at each AR the SALT has been chipping away at the level of provision, reducing it from weekly 1:1, to monthly and now recommending discharging her!

[Sally44]

I presume that the SALT has re-assessed using standardised assessments?

If they have then you should be able to see what her scores were previously, and what they are now.

 

If she hasn't carried out standardised assessments [and they don't automatically, which I why I always recommend you write to them and specifically request that they do - because without the assessment results you have no evidence of lack of progress], you could ask her to carry them out, but I suspect that that opportunity has passed, and so it will be you having to pay an independent SALT to re-assess.

 

And IF you think there is going to be a tribunal about the placement, you might as well hold off and have your daughter re-assessed as part of the appeal process - again just before the deadline for submissions.

 

And chipping away at the provision is what any LA maintained school [including special school] is going to do UNLESS your placement choice has SALT/OT employed on site and where their therapy is provided AS STANDARD.

 

Is it an LA special school you are asking for?