Robust Theme


Annual Review Template FREE

This letter can be cut and paste and emailed to the LA and school prior to your child's annual review.... Make it clear that you will not accept turning up at a review and having reports thrown at you, without having read them before.
Dear LA and School
I am making contact ahead of my childs annual review on DATE...
To confirm -at the upcoming review I would request that I receive reports from all whom attend at least 2 weeks prior, as set out in the SEN code of practice below.
Please see below information from the SEND code of practice around your obligations in terms of a review. I would like yourself and school to ensure these are all met by the 13th Nov:
9.176 The following requirements apply to reviews where a child or young person attends a school or other institution:
• The child’s parents or young person, a representative of the school or other institution attended, a local authority SEN officer, a health service representative and a local authority social care representative must be invited and given at least two weeks’ notice of the date of the meeting. Other individuals relevant to the review should also be invited, including youth offending teams and job coaches where relevant
• The school (or, for children and young people attending another institution, the local authority) must seek advice and information about the child or young person prior to the meeting from all parties invited, and send any advice and information gathered to all those invited at least two weeks before the meeting
• The meeting must focus on the child or young person’s progress towards achieving the outcomes specified in the EHC plan, and on what changes might need to be made to the support that is provided to help them achieve 197 those outcomes, or whether changes are needed to the outcomes themselves. Children, parents and young people should be supported to engage fully in the review meeting
• The school (or, for children and young people attending another institution, the local authority) must prepare and send a report of the meeting to everyone invited within two weeks of the meeting. The report must set out recommendations on any amendments required to the EHC plan, and should refer to any difference between the school or other institution’s recommendations and those of others attending the meeting
• Within four weeks of the review meeting, the local authority must decide whether it proposes to keep the EHC plan as it is, amend the plan, or cease to maintain the plan, and notify the child’s parent or the young person and the school or other institution attended
• If the plan needs to be amended, the local authority should start the process of amendment without delay (see paragraph 9.193 onwards)
• If the local authority decides not to amend the plan or decides to cease to maintain it, they must notify the child’s parent or the young person of their right to appeal that decision and the time limits for doing so, of the requirements for them to consider mediation should they wish to appeal, and the availability of information, advice and support and disagreement resolution services
When completing the reports please let the professionals know that the reports must be able to be cut and paste into the EHCP and therefore meet the minimum requirements.
Please see below the law around the EHCP delivery. This describes the level of specification and detail that the provisions must reach:
Paragraph 9.61 of the Code of Practice issued under the 2014 Act, provides that:
“EHC Plans should be clear, concise, understandable and accessible to parents, children, young people, providers and practitioners. They should be written so they can be understood by professionals in any Local Authority.”
Paragraph 9.69 states that Section F:
“provision must be detailed and specific and should normally be quantified, for example, in terms of the type, hours and frequency of support and level of expertise, including where this support is secured through a Personal Budget”.
Any provision within Section F must be so specific and clear as to leave no room for doubt as to what should be delivered (L v Clarke and Somerset County Council (1998) ELR 129).
IPSEA v Secretary of State for Education and Skills 2003 EWCA Civ 7, (2003) ELR 393 the Court of Appeal held:
“Any flexibility built into the Statement (now EHC Plan Section F) must be there to meet the needs of the child and not the needs of the system.” The decision of the Court of Appeal concluded: “It remains the case that the statements (now EHC Plan Section F) which do not specify the provision appropriate to the identified special educational needs of the child will not comply with the law.”
Kind Regards

50% Complete

Two Step

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.