Statement Ouestion...

[bid]

Hi

 

My son goes to an independent residential special school for AS. He's 16.

 

In Part 3 (Special Educational Provision) of my son's Statement it states that 'He should follow a 24 hour curriculum at school during term-time...School staff should have specific training in teaching pupils with Aspergers Syndrome.'

 

At the end of Part 3 it states 'This provision will be made by the school using its existing resources'. In other words, it recognises that his provision is at a special school.

 

Next year he will leave this school. We are gearing ourselves up to fight for the funding for him to go onto the associated residential special college for AS.

 

Special colleges are funded by the Learning and Skills Council rather than the LEA. They have just changed their rules to make it harder to get this funding

 

My question is ...will my son's Statement continue to be a legally binding document for the LSC? In other words, if his Statement includes the need for a 24 hour curriculum in Part 3, are the LSC legally bound to fulfill this, i.e fund a place at a residential special college??

 

Will phone IPSEA today, but just wondered if any of you 'Statement Wise Ones' might know the answer

 

Bid

[bid]

I've just looked in my ACE Handbook, but it's not very clear, as well as being out of date now

 

It states 'When the LSC becomes responsible for funding...it will...require LEAs to maintain Statements until the end of the academic year in which the young person becomes 19.'

 

But does this mean the Statement is legally binding only after the LSC agrees to fund? What is the status of a Statement in relation to getting the funding in the first place? If a Statement includes the need for a 24 hour curriculum, does the LSC have a legal obligation to fund this??

 

Phew!

 

Any thoughts?

 

Bid

[desperate]

Hi,

I have just had Neil's transition annual review.

Part of his way forward plan was the provision of an ASD college after he leaves school.

The SEN manager for the Lea and Neil's connections worker were there. They stated that the Lea would pay for the provion until Neil was nineteen and then the learning skills council would take over, until he was twenty five if necessary.

They did say that they would need to start looking for a placement now, as they is a greater demand than places available.

I don't know if this helps you at all, I hope so.

[nellie]

Hi Bid,

 

I believe your argument for further education at a specialist residential college remains the same as your previous argument for his present specialist residential school and that mainstream school or college can not meet his needs.

 

Have a look at this http://www.nas.org.uk/nas/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=303&a=3369

 

Website for The Learning and Skills Council http://www.lsc.gov.uk

 

This is the information I have on ceasing to maintain a statement. I'm not sure if it's up to date so it might be wise to check details with IPSEA or the NAS.

 

Ceasing to maintain a Statement.

I believe the law is not clear with regard to special educational provision beyond the age of 16, there have been two court rulings where the judges have disagreed over an LEA?s duty with regard to maintaining statements. I am not aware of any further cases which have clarified this.

 

LEA?s must have regard for the legal procedures and the relevant paragraphs of the Code of Practice.

1)a local education authority may cease to maintain a Statement only if it is not longer necessary to maintain it.

2Where the local education authority determine to cease to maintain a Statement

 

a)They shall give notice of that fact and of the effect of paragraph B. below to the parent of the child, and

b)The parent of the child may appeal to the Tribunal against the determination.

 

These procedures must be followed unless the Statement ceases when the LEA is no longer responsible for the young person because he or she has moved into further or higher education or into employment or training. Where there is disagreement about whether the young person?s needs can be met at a further education college the LEA must contact the college to satisfy itself that the college can meet the needs and offer a place to the young person. It should not cease to maintain the Statement until it has done so. In the event of disagreement the parents have a right of appeal to SENDIST.

 

LEA?s have been criticised where there was a general expectation that all Statemented children would go into further education rather that the decision being taken on a case by case basis taking into account the needs of the child and suitable provision being available at the college.

 

A statement therefore only automatically lapses if a child of over compulsory school age moves out of the school system with the agreement of all parties or when a Tribunal orders the authority to cease to maintain the statement.

 

There are two important points about the time when the decision takes effect:

When the LEA have given the parents notice of their intention to cease to maintain the Statement, the Statement remains in place until the time limit has expired for the parent to lodge an appeal to the Tribunal (two months from the date that the LEA told the parent they could appeal).

 

If the parent appeals the Statement remains in force until the appeal is heard by the Triubunal or withdrawn.

[Kazzen161]

From what I know, some 16+ colleges are LEA funded, but most are LSC.

 

If the 16+ bit is part of a school (like a sixth form) then it is funded by the LEA, and the statement continues (although obviously it is still subject to annual review).

 

If the college is LSC funded, the statement ceases and a Section 170(??) report is written which details the child's needs. This has no legal status though.

 

Your Connexions person should be able to advise on which category the college comes under.

 

There is no "right" to continue into 16+ at a school. Local mainstream colleges have to be approached and agree that they cannot meet the child's needs, before more specialist placements will be considered.

 

Karen