Additional Funding for Operational Needs
One of our schools is requesting additional funding support from the LA as they have been named on a child's EHCP. The difficulty is that the child will be child number 9 - so they will be unable to pair him with another adult, i.e. 1:1 ratio. They are arguing that additional funding is needed to ensure a continuance in how they operate, 1:1.
The LA is arguing that we only have a duty to pay for the provision in the EHCP and not to subsidise their operational approach. The child's EHCP states that 1:2 is required to meet needs, not 1:1.
But, if the school can demonstrate that the extra support is needed & is linked to the child's SEN and provision needed to meet their needs, then we must provide this. However, if the current funding is demonstrably enough, then it is up to the school as to how it organises itself and not for the LA to provide additional funding to ensure that 1:1 continues.
Is this correct? Is there any case law/commentary on this?
Not that I'm aware of, although this is not surprising as I would not expect a LA and a school to spend lots of money on legal fees arguing about this in court - a complaint to the SoS seems obviously the best way to resolve any such dispute. As a matter of law, the LA duty is to secure the provision in section F (s.42(2)) and the school's duty is to use its best endeavours to secure it (s.66(2)). If the funding provided by you is, as you say, "demonstrably enough" to secure the provision in question then you are correct that you do not have to provide additional funds, but I suspect that the school would contend otherwise and that is what any dispute would be likely to turn on.