SCN0678
Written evidence from Parental Submission 169
- I am writing with reference to my experience trying to access help including funding for my now 10-year-old daughter.
- It was clear from early childhood that my little girl had some delays, in fact she was globally delayed but not significantly enough to be picked up on and referred to a paediatrician. I was told she had failure to thrive, but this was never followed up on.
- At Nursery delays in speech were picked up on and an unwillingness to participate in groups plus a lack of general understanding verbal instructions. She then moved on to school now at this point I must point out our geographical situation.
- The village we live in is a border village, it not only borders [local authority 1] and [local authority 2] but also as you can see [country 1] and [country 2]. I never thought much about this, until school tried to access additional help for my daughter. She was put on school action in Reception Class and then school action plus in Year 2 after additional help within school failed to see acceptable progress in fact she was just falling further and further behind her peers.
- Her class teacher accessed SALT through [local authority 2] and 2 rounds of therapy were carried out after which again she was tested and found that absolutely no progress had been made. School requested additional input from [local authority 2] which was refused. School then asked If I could take her to the doctors and see if we could get some help and answers that way. She attended a Paediatrician but by this time was 6 years old and so I was told at this age responsibility lay with the education department.
- I then applied as apparent to [local authority 1] SEN for an EHCP Assessment which was refused on the basis we didn’t have the right evidence, This raises my first concern, Evidence gathering is set by LA and so an inconsistency arises if a child lives in one LA but attends a school in a different LA, this causes detrimental delays and stress for Child, parent and teachers alike. I strongly feel that evidence gathering and the forms that need to be submitted should be standardized across [country 1] and [country 2] to ensure delays like this are addressed.
- Eventually after I appealed a meeting was held between [local authority 1] SENCO, myself and my daughters School. The school then submitted new evidence using the [local authority 1] system and my daughter was awarded to full amount of funding under the graduated support Plan. And we were told that this would be review after a year and then if needed we could re apply for and EHC Plan. It was also recommended that school apply to CAMHS for and ASD assessment. She had that assessment and has been put on the ASD Pathway although we have had no indication how long this is expected to take. She was awarded 15 hrs of 1:1 TA and additional funds for learning tools like memory booster, additional Maths on an I Pad etc…
- Then in a follow up meeting in November last year I was informed that [local authority 1] and [local authority 2] LA’s had been having a disagreement as to who’s pot of money my daughters funding should come from. [Local authority 1] state that they pay for [local authority 2] Pupils attending [local authority 1] schools so [local authority 2] should be doing the same, well to cut a long story short my daughter has had NO FUNDING SINCE DECEMBER!! My daughters school have had to be finding alternative ways to pay for her TA as they know how much she needs it, in the words of her Head Mistress ‘I cannot take her TA away, I just can’t because then we would not be providing our duty of care’ this was said with tears in both of our eyes.
- I was asked by the head to e mail [local authority 1] and [local authority 2] explaining how much my daughter needed this funding and the TA but I had no response from either TA and after new budget cuts to the school [redacted] my daughter will be without the provision she desperately requires from next week.
March 2019