"The reason we provide a full spec and a recommended supplier for
equipment is to hopefully ensure that the student gets equipment and
SERVICE which meets their individual needs."

With all due respect you are being paid to provide a service ie advise an
LEA on the best way to ensure a student is not placed at a disadvantage
because they are disabled. Ensuring that support is provided is the
responsibility of both the LEA and the HEI. If either party fail in that
duty, it is they who will be held accountable, not the Access Centre who
made the original recommendations.

"We have some experience of LEAs who have their 'pet' suppliers, who
provide a standard package to all dyslexic students with no consideration
of the student's individual needs or who use suppliers (sometimes LEA
contract suppliers) with no experience of specialist software or hardware
who provide little or no back up service."

What is your definition of a standard package? Are we talking hardware or
software now? I will happily provide you with the specs of our "standard
package" as provided by our "pet suppliers" (interesting phraseology -
Access Centres have valued and trusted suppliers whereas LEA's have "pet"
suppliers) and perhaps you could indicate the areas in which it is
lacking. Specialist software is purchased and pre-installed by our
supplier as is any hardware not already included in the basic PC spec.

"We also have experience of students who have bought their equipment
 'down the High Street' (often neglecting to purchase the specialist
software which is the main reason for recommending the computer) and then
having difficulties in getting any advice, service, repair etc without
endless expensive phone calls and delays during which they are unable to
work."

An argument for LEA using their own suppliers then rather than leaving it
to the student. If a student has any problems with any equipment I've
purchased then they can call me and I'll make the endless expensive phone
calls. Are you prepared to do that if we use your recommended supplier?

"Apologies for the rant, but as professional assessors who have met and
talked to the student for some time perhaps we are a tad better able to
judge the appropriate equipment and supplier than an Awards Officer who
has probably only seen the paper work.  My belief was that the Awards
Officer's main role was to judge whether the DSA application met the
rules, that the recommendations were reasonable within the justification
provided by the report and that the costs incurred where not excessive."

No apology necessary :)

However I will remember this and quote you next time I'm accused of
poking my nose in where it's not needed because I've dared to question or
even (gasp) refuse a recommendation made by an Access Centre. In fact I
make it my business to learn as much as possible about assistive
technology. I've used most of the more common software solutions
extensively, made every effort to track down and evaluate hardware
solutions (hence my annual pilgrimage to BETT) and generally use every
means at my disposal to ensure I know what I'm purchasing and why. Please
don't belittle my knowledge, experience or professionalism - I do far
more than shuffle paper work. Call me a cynic but I don't take anything
at face value, no matter how professional you consider yourself to be nor
how UNprofessional you consider Awards Officers to be. You may well meet
and talk to the student for several hours - I meet and talk to them for
the next 3 to 4 years. Believe me, it's in LEA's best interests to ensure
the support provided is both appropriate and reliable.

St.John Skeates
Awards Section
Bedfordshire County Council



*********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed.

If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please advise the sender immediately
by using the reply facility in your e-mail software.
Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer.

Any modification of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited
unless expressly authorised by the sender.
*********************************************************************