Robust ThemeDec 09, 2019 2020-04-08 7:40
Received Poor Reports? FREE TEMPLATE
What do I do if my reports come back from the EHC assessment and they are NO GOOD. (poor level of detail, not enough info).
Send this email below to the LA. This will create a clear paper trail to show that you are not happy with the level of specification.
Poorly specified reports may affect your chance at a plan being issued and will certainly mean you get a bad draft plan.
Dear 0-25 team
Thank you for the reports you have gathered for my child. I have great concern that the reports do not meet the standard required to create a clear picture of needs and provisions. The reports must be specified and quantified in line with SEN Law.
Please see below some information around specification: By law, section F must describe all aspects of the provision which differ from the provision normally made in mainstream institutions in England. Thus, for example, section F must specify (where relevant): a) Placement in a different year group b) Different/smaller class sizes c) Staff qualifications/experience d) Where small group work is involved, the size of the small group, the length and frequency of sessions e) The need for and amount of 1:1 work and the qualification of the adult/staff providing the support
In regard to my child’s reports we would request that it clearly states, preferably in table format:
· All needs for section B in Cognition and Learning/Communication and Interaction/ Social emotional and mental health/Sensory and Physical, following any assessments carried out
· Reference to other professionals that are needed to input if you have noted a need but not fully assessed or reported on it - for example -request for referral to an OT/SALT/Physio etc
· A summary list of the needs for each area
· Outcomes to meet those needs which are SMART (Specific Measurable Achievable Realistic and Timebound)
· Provision to reach the outcomes.
Please see below the law around the EHCP delivery. This describes the level of specification and detail that the provisions must reach:
Paragraph9.61 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.”
Paragraph9.69 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.”
I am very concerned that if you do not specify in line with the information above there will be no way of telling at a panel whether a plan must be issued or understanding what type of setting and support must be provided.
Please can you assure me you will go back to the professional report writers and ask them to re-visit their reports.
If this is not done I will be questioning the reports in line with the above information at draft stage.