[senco-forum] RE: Increased powewrs of the SENDIST

For years the policy of the organisation with whom I'm a volunteer has pressed the goverment (alongside other concerned organisations) for increased policing powers for the SENDIST -- in relation to LA unlawful actions within the SEN legal framework. And was part of its submission to consultations on the setting up of the new Equalities Commission and in its evidence to the Select Committee Enquiry on SEN.

At last a positive response! Let's hope this new law and Body leads to more statutory assessments and statements when they are required. And that it redresses the balance against unjustified refusals, as shown by the recent significantly reduced number of newly issued statements, in the teeth of increased demand and increasingly failing mainstream SEN children; the hugely increased number of appeals against refusals; and the 90+ success rates of those appeals -- indicating the very high level of unjustified refusals nationwide. See Press Release: 

‘Well done Government, and a big thank you!’

The Independent Panel for Special Education Advice (IPSEA), the largest parent-led national charity supporting parents of children with special educational needs, has welcomed the Government’s latest move to improve local authorities’ decision-making on disabled children’s educational needs and how they can be best met.

Local Authorities have been charged in law since 1983 with the duties to assess children’s special educational needs and to provide for them. Sadly, history has shown over the years that many Authorities make their decisions on the basis of resources rather than individual children’s needs – which is what the law intends.

The Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal has had the job of sorting out disputes between parents and Local Authorities and much of IPSEA’s time is taken up with representing parents before such Tribunals. But in the past this has been a frustrating task, for the Tribunals themselves have only been able to pass judgement on the individual cases before them. So although they could correct a wrong decision in relation to one child, they could do nothing to help the many other children who may be being damaged by a Local Authority’s unlawful policies.

This situation has improved as a result of the Government’s Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act, 2007. From now on, a new public body – the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council – has a duty to improve Local Authorities’ original decision-making, where this is at fault. And, the Senior President of the Tribunal in his Annual Report must document the quality (of lack of quality) of original decision-making as this is revealed by the workings of Tribunals.

IPSEA’s Acting Chief Executive, Angie Lee-Foster, today said:

“There are many examples from our case work with parents of Local Authorities making decisions which are not only wrong for the individual children concerned, but wrong for all children, and wrong in law: 

refusing to assess children’s needs on the grounds that they have delegated the resources for children with special needs to schools own budgets; or because a child does not meet local criteria which usually are at odds with the Government’s Code of Practice; 
refusing to include speech therapy as an educational need, which means it has to be provided for, on the grounds that it is Health Trusts which employ therapists; 
refusing to quantify the help children should receive in their Statements, which robs them of their legal entitlement to receive that help on the grounds that ‘quantification’ is not a legal requirement, when in fact case law and the Government’s own Code of Practice insists that it almost always is. 

Hitherto Tribunals hearing appeals against decisions made on such unlawful grounds have been unable to do anything other than correct the situation for the one child before them; in effect, allowing Local Authorities to leave a Tribunal, lick their wounds in relation to the single case, but carry on as before with regard to all of the other children with special needs for whom they are responsible. Typically, these will be the children whose parents have not appealed – likely to be the most vulnerable children from the most needy families. Now, thanks to the new Act, Local Authorities will be under greater pressure to accurately assess and meet children’s special educational needs.”

Sent by Brendan King

________________________________________________________________________
AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now.