Our SN area is not a substitute for expert advice. While many Mumsnetters have a specialist knowledge of special needs, if they post here they are posting as members, not experts. There are, however, lots of organisations that can help - some suggestions are listed here. If you've come across an organisation that you've found helpful, please tell us. Go to Special needs chat, Parents with disabilities, SN teens, SN legal, SN education, SN recommendations.

Our LEA is now no longer issuing statements

(57 Posts)
Ifcatshadthumbs Thu 27-Jun-13 20:52:32

Anyone else being told the same? What does this mean for children who already have one?

inappropriatelyemployed Fri 28-Jun-13 20:50:49

And the LAs do have powers over their delegated funding and could be more thorough in ensuring the funds were used accountably.

The reality is that most LAs don't bemoan, they rejoice in this delegation as a way of side-stepping legal responsibility. Parents are consistently told they don't 'do' statements as schools have all the money but it is the LA and not the school that chooses how much to delegate - or it has been.

LAs are not impotent victims. Most heads are desperate to toe the LA line as the career prospects often depend on it. I know a head who had to move out of county because he didn't do what the LA wanted on SEN.

Heads who stand up for children against LA bullying that the child doesn't need help are few and far between.

TOWIELA Fri 28-Jun-13 21:10:30

LAs are not impotent victims.

I agree. Having seen the DPA material just in my son's case, they are far from being the victims. They are antagonistic and deploy tactics to wear down parents so that parents give up (parents=me). LAs also employ tactics to make schools suddenly tow the party line despite schools saying for months that they can't support certain children (children=my son).

AgnesDiPesto Sat 29-Jun-13 00:47:20

Our LA has delegated 20 hours for several years and reduced number of statements. It objected to new school funding changes on basis that here the £6000 would only cover 12 hours and so it would actually have to start writing statements again for children between 12-20 hours when it had not written statements for these children for years. They made out this would be a huge admin burden but when questioned did not actually know how many children were on between 12 and 20 hours or how many statements they would need to write. Its interesting some LAs have calculated it as 20 hours when our LA (rural county council) says £6000 does not cover 20 hours. Be worth finding out what formula they are applying to get to £6000. Here they use a standard formula of about £490 which they times by weekly hours to get to £6000 which is supposed to cover TA cost. The figure used to be £530 but over past few years they have reduced the rate schools get for TAs so each year too.

inappropriatelyemployed Sat 29-Jun-13 07:33:34

There is a difference between delegating the funds and refusing to write statements.

I know a lot of LAs have argued that if funds are delegated to schools, children don't need statements and David Wolfe did a piece on the legal position for IPSEA which is on the net somewhere because who funds the statements should never been the issue.

Different LAs have always had different approaches about funding and this was something the new rules aimed to tackle. But it seems to me that this doesn't change the position as regard whether, in law, a child needs a statement. Similarly the new school funding changes should have no impact on statementing, just the funding of it.

However, delegation arguments aside, it seems LMB is saying something quite different, namely that LAs may now be directly linking the arrival of the CFB (and not just the 6000 delegatiion of funds) and possible future changes with EHCs to the removal of children's statements and I think that is very worrying.

To see children have their statement taken from them on the basis of a proposed future change in the law suggests that LAs may be using these changes as an opportunity not only to reduce statements but to remove them.

And the idea there is a target figure from Government for the number of children to receive support is very concerning

TOWIELA Sat 29-Jun-13 10:09:03

Agnes - please can you explain your comment Here they use a standard formula of about £490 which they times by weekly hours to get to £6000 which is supposed to cover TA cost. The figure used to be £530 but over past few years they have reduced the rate schools get for TAs so each year too.

I am really confused by the way LAs cost placings. For my DS's Tribunal, the cost of a place at the LA's named school is very very important (it doesn't matter where the money comes from, just the actual hard cash "cost". So I'm trying to get my head around the LAs costings. They say a year's place at a mainstream school with a SPL Unit is £575 per year - this is for the teaching, the unit and for the SALT. So what do you mean by "£490 which they times..".

Thanks!

nennypops Sun 30-Jun-13 15:35:31

The only valid reason for removing a statement is that the child no longer needs it. If any council is removing them solely because of an internal policy, that is illegal and could be challenged through the courts. I think any case would be in the name of the child so legal aid would be available.

inappropriatelyemployed Sun 30-Jun-13 15:53:19

Absolutely Nenny. Agnes is very wise about these things and I know she would entirely agree hut what she says demonstrates how 'routine' and ingrained these practices are.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now