Hi Joanne

You might also want to reference the recent Education Select Committee’s SEND Inquiry Report from Oct 2019 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201919/cmselect/cmeduc/20/20.pdf   This is entirely evidence based, using a wide range of national practitioners and service users. The main section on EHCPs begins on page 46, and there are recommendation about EHCPs in paragraphs 17 and 20 of the Conclusions and Recommendations at the end, as well as a comment in the third paragraph of the Summary of their findings (p4 of the Report).

I hope this is helpful.

Max

That's great thank you very much Max.

I retired in December 2018. Towards the end of my 10 years in that post I noticed that the D seemed to have disappeared and EHCPs were given for learning needs and behavioural issues, but Physical Disabilities and long term Medical Needs were being refused. At the panel meetings behaviour, such as smashing up classrooms, is a very obvious need and people can get hurt, so these pupils were getting them straight away. We had to make a strong case even for the obvious ones, such as pupils with CP who needed an adult to help them access the toilet, do physio, transfer between equipment etc. I also had to clarify that a pupil with multiple medical needs was now attending school less than half the time and his learning was starting to suffer, and he would need support.

Pre-EHCP, statements allowed for pupils who needed a small number of hours support, but in practice this was difficult for schools to sort out, as the Tea hing Assistants couldn’t just come and go for short spells or hang around somewhere!

It should be the case that, after receiving a diagnosis of a lifelong condition such as DMD, SMA, CP, etc., a person should automatically be entitled to an EHCP, and this should be lifelong, not just to the arbitrary age of 25. This simple requirement would save countless young people and their families the frustration and anxiety they currently experience, not to mention saving LAs and central government the money spent on tribunals, which can run to tens of thousands of pounds each time; this could then instead be spent on actually providing the necessary support.

Part of the problem seems to be lack of understanding by LA SEN officers (I note they aren't called SEND officers) around the fact that many CYP with PD have no cognitive impairment, leading these officers to deny these pupils the support they require on a daily basis simply to attain the same level of access to education as their non-disabled peers, as laid out very clearly in the CoP.

Max