Statements - please tell me more

[beautifulgirls]

Hi - I have a 3yr2mth daughter who is not due to start school until Sept 2009 when she is just about going to turn 5yrs thankfully. She is currently having speech therapy with a suspicion of dyspraxia, though no specific "label" as yet.

A few people recently have asked me if I have considered getting a statement for her re this. I have read a couple of websites but to be honest apart from understanding that they are a way of detailing extra help at the school where needed I do not understand a lot more about them.

I am particularly interested in the downside of getting this done if there is one, when is best to get it done, and what are the advantages overall when she is having therapy already - would that be done in school in future or would I still take her to speech therapy sessions outside of school?

Can anyone tell me how this relates at all to private schools too. We have considered this as one option for the smaller class sizes - assuming we are happy the school can cater for her issues too of course. That we need to look into more. Is there any degree of assisted funding in these cases though?

Thanks

[neverfree]

A statement of SEN is basically an assessment of what extra things your child may need in school and a way of telling the school about her problems. If you think her condition will lead to her struggling at school in any way then ask for a statement. It will mean she can get extra help which could be speech therapy (therapies tend to dry up at 5 and are done via schools but you need a statment) or a laptop(when older) or extra time to do things or whatever.
You don't need to be in school to have a statment. But if you have one, any state school you are at are obliged to provide any extra help the statement says your child needs. A private school would require you to pay for that extra help unless you are very good at hassling your LA! My dd has a statement. it sets out her problems - quad CP, blind, can't speak etc and sets out her needs - one to one at all times, speech therapy, physio and OT, help with everything from pushing her wheelchair to large print books which must be provided for her (she's at mainstream school). It also sets out what equipment she needs in school - special chair, communication aids, large print books and the school must provide all of these by law.
Obviously my dd is severely disabled so her statement is more like a book but imo, if your child needs any extra help at all, or would find school tougher than the average then you need a statement. its better than teachers labelling her slow or not taking into account that there maybe some things she can't cope with.

[dustystar]

The best thing about a statement is that its legally binding. The school have to meet the objectives outlined in the statement.

[beautifulgirls]

Thank you for the information. I shall talk more to the speech therapists she sees and see what they suggest too re the future and the need to get a statement or not. Thankfully we have time on our side at present and I still have hope that things will improve a lot more in the short term for her.

Neverfree - Big hugs for you and your daughter. I hope that her school respects the statement well and provide all that she needs without needing to be pushed and causing you any more stress that you undoubtedly have.

[neverfree]

Thnakyou Beautiful girls. I'm sure they will cos I'm already 'nuisance mum from hell'. Am in a wheelchair myself and involved in disability rights and inclusion.
And I'll go kick in their doors

[scoggins]

Hello beautiful girls - I am an INclusion Manager in an Inner city London primary school and part of my job is to apply for statements for some of our most needy children.
A statement outlines in details the special needs of your child in the opinion of several professionals e.g. speech therapist psychologist, doctor, teacher, and yourself. The statement then goes on to list what the school should be providing to meet those special needs e.g. Statements often have sentences like 'A program of literacy' very vague! The final part of the statemebt gives the number of hours of support the school must dedicate to your child per week. This can be anything from 5hrs- 25hrs per week depending on the severity of the need. How the support is given is up to the school - it could be 1-1 for 30 minutes per day it could be in a group of 2 or 3 with a teaching assistant, or it could be in a group of 6 for literacy and numeracy daily.
Schools can also buy in specialist services from their local authority or the PCT - e.g. in our school I buy in a specialist teacher of autism, a specialist teacher for dyslexic children and an educational psychologist.
In order to be awarded a statement you need to have at least 2 professionals involved with your child over a period of 2 terms. IN my experience just having some speech therapy is not enough to warrant a statement - the local authority wouldn't even consider it unless it went along with a multitude of other needs.
It is very unusual for a statement to be awarded to a child so young unless there is a severe physcial or emotional need and I have also never known of a child to get a statement because they have dyspraxia - they are more likely to be on the school's special needs register and be allocated support that way.
IN our school kids have statements for things like severe ADHD, moderate learning difficulties which puts their IQ at around 65-70. Autistic spectrum disorders.
Hope this helps

[beautifulgirls]

Thanks scoggins. We are lucky that it seems the only problem she has is her speech, so therefore from what you have said she will not need/get a statement anyway. She is still young and they are monitoring her understanding etc too, but she does seem to be making good progress at present so we are hopeful that she will not be so behind her peers when she does start at school.

I think based upon all of this I do not need to rush into anything as it is probably not necessary for us all to go through this, and we should concentrate our efforts on working with the therapists for now.

[scoggins]

Just incase you do want to pursue the statement in later years keep the paperwork very safe that you are receiving from the SALT.
xx

[beautifulgirls]

Thank you - I will do that.

[stokeymummyn16]

you should be aware that the statement process has changed and that education authorities no longer give out specified hours for statements,but a level of funding. This may be none if your child has needs that it is felt that the school should meet under their exisiting funding. Apparently, schools get a % of devolved funding for SEN from the education authority for your run of the mill issues (no offence meant) such as issues with reading etc. and more specialised and complex needs in theory have a level of funding that exists within a band. i imagine that across the country the band criterias are the same but the level of funding may differ. My son has a draft statement and has received approx £6000 pa for additoinal support in the school. He will need input from within the school that has been specified and shaped by interventions from OT, SLT, physiotherapist, psychology and audiology. My understanding is that any higher level of funding is when specific professionals may need to do more high end intervention within the school setting.
his case went to panel in July this year, after having been flagged up in nursery. My son is now in year 2.The school had working with him on specific exercises, SLT group, one to one, specific reading programme, specific exercise programme, ILP, and schools education plus (i think it is called)and had reports from the above said professionals that has visited him within the school over the previous year or so. This held him in good stead. He has been assessed for the statement by two doctors- physical assessment, hearing eye and physical tests, psychological tests by a psychologist, OT assessment, SLT assessment, and also has been referred to a gene clinic for further queries re. Fragile X
phew! been stressful but the main issue is that the school was on board and indeed was leading with the process- and we felt supported not out on a limb.
speak to your school's SENCO
good luck!

[daisy5678]

Stokey mummy - not all authorities have the same system and indeed the allocation of £6000 given to your son is illegal - there is a case just like it on the IPSEA website. The statement MUST set out the provision that will meet the child's needs; they can't just say an amount.

So to say that education authorities no longer give out specified hours for statements is totally misleading - most DO because they are required to by law. Again, IPSEA is very good for detailed information about provision being quantified apart from the most exceptional circumstances e.g. special schools may not need to specify the amount of 1:1 time.

Just didn't want anyone mislead by your information - and call IPSEA to check out your son's statement as it is completely unlawful to give £6000 and not specify provision!

[stokeymummyn16]

i did not state that my son was only getting £6000 and nothing else
the support from the professionals i listed equated to about that amount- it is within the band of additional support
the main thrust of what I was saying was that hours are not written into the statement- this has recently changed but people fall within a band of provision

i am sorry that you felt that i have been misleading

[daisy5678]

Hours MUST be written into the statement apart from in exceptional circumstances! So sorry but it is misleading to say "hours are not written into the statement"! It is the law - check out IPSEA.

I've cut and pasted here:

DUTY TO QUANTIFY PROVISION:

The starting point for this duty is Section 324(ii), (iii)(b) and (iv)(c) of the Education Act 1996. These provisions require statements to be set out in the form prescribed by regulations, to specify the educational provisions required and to specify any provision to be made otherwise than in school.

The Regulations prescribing the form and content of statements of special educational needs are the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001 (and the virtually identical regulations for Wales: the Education (Special Educational Needs) (Wales) Regulations 2002). Regulation 16 provides that a statement of special educational needs must be in a form "substantially corresponding" to the example set out in Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and must also contain the information set out in Schedule 2.

Schedule 2 sets out the format for a statement of special educational needs. At Part 3 of the example statement, the following is set out:-

?Educational provision to meet needs and objectives

[Here specify the special educational provision which the Authority consider appropriate to meet the needs specified in Part 2 and to meet the objectives specified in this part and in particular specify?

(a) any appropriate facilities and equipment, staffing arrangements and curriculum)?
Section 324(ii), (iii)(b) and (iv)(c), EA 1996

The Education (Special Educational Needs) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001, Reg. 16 and Schedule 2
This obligation is also reflected in paragraphs 8:36 and 8:37 of the Code of Practice on Special Educational Needs, which LEAs and Tribunals must "have regard to":

?8:36 A statement should specify clearly the provision necessary to meet the needs of the child. It should detail appropriate provision to meet each identified need ??

8:37 ? Provision should normally be quantified (e.g. in terms of hours of provision, staffing arrangements) although there will be cases where some flexibility should be retained in order to meet the changing special educational needs of the child concerned."
Paragraphs 8:34 and 8.37 of the Special Educational Needs Code of Practice


These duties have been tested extensively in the Courts. In particular, in R v Secretary of State for Education and Science Ex Parte E (1992) 1 FLR 277, the Court of Appeal confirmed that where a child requires a statement, all of the provision required to meet a child?s special educational needs must be set out in that statement. Whilst that case was concerned with the Education Act 1981 (a precursor of the current legislation contained in Part IV of the Education Act 1996), and whilst the case was also principally concerned with whether or not provision which could be made by the school should also be set out in a statement (which it should) the case, by implication, also underscores the point that provision must be specified and quantified, otherwise the intention of the judgement would be defeated.
R. v Secretary of State for Education and Science Ex Parte E (1992) 1FLR277
One reason why LEAs may wish not to specify provision is because they may then be required to arrange provision (pursuant to Section 324(5)(a)(i) of the Education Act 1996) over and beyond that which they have already funded. For example, they may have arrangements with Local Health Authorities for the provision of speech and language therapy but only to a limited extent, so that specificity of speech and language therapy beyond that which they have already funded may require additional and separate arrangements. However, this is not a legitimate reason for refusing to specify and, indeed, in R v London Borough of Harrow Ex Parte M (1997) ELR62, the Court affirmed the obligation of the LEAs to arrange provision set out in Part 3 of a statement, even where they had asked the Health Authority to arrange it, where the Health Authority had not done so.
R v London Borough of Harrow Ex Parte M (1997) ELR62
In L v Clarke (Chair of Special Educational Needs Tribunal) & Somerset County Council [1998] ELR 129, the High Court specifically considered whether a statement should be specified and quantified. The Court determined that, ordinarily, statements should have a "high degree of specificity". Of course, there may be circumstances where specificity is not possible or desirable but, generally speaking, this should be the exception rather than the rule. Indeed, the reason why specificity is so important is, as set out in the Code of Practice, so that everyone is clear as to what the child concerned is entitled to, and ought to be receiving.
L v Chair Of Special Educational Needs Tribunal & Anor [1997] EWHC Admin 792
Sometimes, LEAs determine not to quantify or specify provision for children whose statements provide for them to attend special schools. There is nothing in law which limits the obligation to quantify and specify provision to those children not attending special schools. However, in E v London Borough of Newham and the Special Educational Needs Tribunal [2003] ELR 286, the Court of Appeal accepted that, where a child was attending a special school, a lower level of specificity may be appropriate. E v Newham London Borough Council and the Special Educational Needs Tribunal [2003] EWCA Civ 09
LEAs often seek to rely on that decision to argue generally that provision for a child at a special school should not be specified or quantified. However, the obligation still remains to specify and quantify provision, except where there are good reasons not to do so. Merely attending a special school is not a sufficient reason not to specify provision and "flexibility" must be something that the child needs. As the Court of Appeal said in a case brought by IPSEA, (R (on the application of IPSEA Ltd) v Secretary of State for Education and Skills) [2003] ELR 393): "any flexibility built into the statement must be there to meet the needs of the child, and not the needs of the system." any flexibility built into the statement must be there to meet the needs of the child, and not the needs of the system
IPSEA Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Education and Skills [2003] EWCA Civ 7 (20 January 2003)
Another closely related issue which arose in E was whether it could be lawful for the LEA to include provision in a statement which was subject to an assessment to be undertaken at a later date. The Court indicated that generally this would not be lawful, a view also given by the High Court in C v SENT and London Borough of Greenwich [1999] ELR 5.
However, there will also be exceptions to this rule, and in some cases, particularly where the level of provision needed will not be known until a child begins at a particular school and is given an assessment, it may simply not be possible to specify provision. C v Special Educational Needs Tribunal & Anor [1998] EWHC Admin 1029 (3 November 1998)
In those circumstances, one way of providing some protection is to set out a minimum, or an approximate, level of provision. This possibility has been raised by the High Court in a number of cases (including H v Gloucestershire County Council and Bowden [2000] ELR 357 and H v Leicestershire County Council [2000] ELR 471) and if the LEA fails to even do this then the statement may be unlawful. H v Gloucestershire County Council and Bowden [2000] ELR 357
H v Leicestershire County Council [2000] ELR 471
If no minimum is specified (and it may be that in some cases it is not possible to do this), there is a risk that if the statement is left with an entirely open-ended amount of provision, then the LEA may be able to reduce the amount of provision at any time, without giving the parents a right of appeal to the Tribunal against that change. Accordingly, even where provision is for a time (and for a good reason) not specified and quantified, once it becomes possible for the LEA to specify and quantify provision, they should do so.

The logical approach to drafting a statement is first to define the needs (Part 2), then the provision to meet those needs (Part 3), and finally to name a school that can meet those needs (Part 4). Unless all of the provision in Part 3 is adequately specified, the right school may not be named. Accordingly, even if the school placement is the most important aspect for a child, special educational provision should still be specified in Part 3.

David Ruebain
Levenes Solicitors
Ashley House
235-239 High Road
London N22 8HF
020 8881 7777
[email protected]
www.levenes.co.uk "

the link is www.ipsea.org.uk/legalnote.htm

I would HATE someone who has their child's statement unspecificed to read your message and think that that's OK - sorry, that's why I'm feeling the need to prove you wrong - not to be arsey or personal but to be sure that people know their rights.