While I can appreciate the points being made here I do not think this
discussion gives a full picture of the situation. It is not my place to defend
individual suppliers but the DfES, Disability Officers and assessors involved in the
DSA process appreciate the presence of committed suppliers in this market who
make genuine efforts to provide a complete service to students with
disabilities. Indeed the new guidelines will encourage this.
As regards value for money for the student. I believe that DfES are aware
that the obvious costs of such suppliers are generally higher and that this is
reflected in the levels of the DSA Allowances. If students were to buy off the
shelf from lower cost companies the equipment allowances would either be
reduced or not increased in line with inflation. In addition the great majority of
students would encounter difficulties and probably not gain as much benefit
from the equipment.
Of course it is important to get good value for money but I have had to deal
with a large number of cases where students have purchased equipment
themselves or where suppliers outside the DSA SLA scheme have been used. In the cases
refered to me the students have not been provided with appropriate equipment,
have often experienced difficulties with support and the money has generally
not been well spent.
While individual sartudents may be capable of making appropriate decisions on
suppliers and equipment, the vast majority in my experience are not. It would
not be possible for the funding agency or the assessor to deterrmine which
students are so capable. It may be that the suppliers do sometimes get it wrong
but when they do the LEA and the assessor can put pressure on the supplier to
put things right and if necessary decline to use the supplier. This would not
be possible if students purchased directly.
This is not saying "we know best", just that assessors and LEAs see a wider
picture and have responsibility for all students, not just tjhe
technicalogically literate. We do know that the system is not perfect which is why
discussions have been taking oplace for over a year to improve the level of service.
The views of students are not excluded. Comments and contibutions from
students who have used the system can be forwarded to DfES or the NUS or SKILL who
will put these views to the SLA working group.
Mick Trott
|