EDITOR'S CHOICE RICHMOND NEWS Bus fatality driver: ‘I lost control of vehicle’ Suzy 'unlikely to be Wright victim' Former council worker all set to become mayor Riverside plan is labelled 'high risk' BRENTFORD NEWS Teacher’s Tube ‘suicide jump’ Cabbie’s emergency stop to help deliver baby boy Hijacker works at Heathrow Terminal 5 boss quits VOTE Should parents have to pay for permits to drop their children off at school? Yes No I don't know GET OUR NEWS BY E-MAIL Just register

Most read Comments 1 Teacher’s Tube ‘suicide jump’ 2 Bus fatality driver: ‘I lost control of vehicle’ 3 Hijacker works at Heathrow 4 Scott still hopeful of keeping Heywood at Griffin Park 5 Somewhere over the rainbow lies equality for one and all Today | 7 Days 1 One post office saved, 37 to go 2 Train vandals sentenced 3 Residents are asked to reconsider CPZ refusal 4 Boris unveils alcohol ban plan 5 Transport booze ban to start in June 6 Sub-postmasters warn more closures could be on the way 7 Terminal 5 boss quits 8 Time Lord's Twickenham daughter follows in his footsteps 9 Swimmer feared for his life in attack by youths 10 Gangmaster jailed for £2.5million tax scam

Comment

Borough children with special educational needs are being let down by incompetent service providers, according to a borough charity.

A joint area review (Jar) this year described the special educational needs (SEN) department as "outstanding" but Twickenham based SOS!SEN has rubbished these findings and branded the report as "yet another whitewash".

At a meeting of the education and children's services overview and scrutiny committee on April 23, charity co-founder Marion Strudwick also blasted the council for having one of the worst records for special needs tribunals in the country.

She said: "It seems stupid to go out and investigate the fact that Richmond has so many appeals and then come back with a report saying it's all wonderful; if it was they self-evidently wouldn't get so many appeals."

In 2006-7, nine tribunal cases were withdrawn, one was dismissed and eight were ruled in favour of the parents.

A father of a child with special educational needs, Paul Hampartsoumia, described the handling of his child's case as "disorganised" and "poor".

Fellow founder Bob Parslow accused the SEN panel of "contriving to stop one child obtaining his proper provision for two-and-a-quarter years". He alleged that the council "ducked out" of a High Court action before giving provision on the same evidence that was presented at the first appeal.

Mr Parslow added: "If the task group found no evidence of a dishonest or unfair assessment process - then it must be incompetence."

The council's cabinet member for children's services and education, Councillor Malcolm Eady, said: "Richmond's SEN work was assessed in the Jar as outstanding and described as providing a comprehensive, integrated service' with no significant weaknesses'.

"The number of times that parents have taken their case to a tribunal has fallen year on year since 2005.

"An appeal is classed as upheld if any amendment, however minor, is made to a statement of special educational need."

Chairwoman of the scrutiny committee, Suzette Nicholson, added: "I think to call this service incompetent and disorganised is unfair."

8:56am Saturday 10th May 2008

Print

Email this

Comment

Add your comment

Name:
Email: *
Location:
**
	e.g. 123-123
Comment: Please note: All HTML tags will be ignored. Format Text:
By posting a comment, I confirm that I have read and agree to the terms of use. Comments are not moderated but we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention and we may delete inappropriate postings. Please treat other people with respect. You must not post anything that is abusive, indecent, unlawful or defamatory. Remember, you are personally liable for what you post on this site. If you wish to complain about a comment, contact us here.
* Your email address will not be displayed ** To avoid register now or login