Forwarded on behalf of Pete Lester
-----Original Message-----
From: A private list for NADP members. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Pete Lester
Sent: 31 July 2008 13:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: SLD authorisation of dyslexia tuition and scotopic sensitivity
lenses/overlays
Dear all
I thought the following 2 responses from might be of interest to
colleagues.
I have just received email verification from the SFD Processing Unit,
Darlington regarding my questions to them about:
1. Dyslexia tuition
In a recent Assessment of Needs report sent to SFD Darlington, after
discussion with the student, I had recommended 30 hours of 1:1 dyslexia
tuition. More often, I recommend much less, so the amount was in no
way, a 'standard' phrase.
However, SFD have responded to the effect that they would initially
authorise only 10 hours, and that ...
"We need written confirmation from the disability officer confirming
that extra hours of tuition are required. This should also state why the
extra hours are required, ie because of difficulties associated with the
disability."
This will seemingly require students who are recommended more than 10
hours to revisit their HEI disability officer, upon completion of the 10
hours, to discuss an application for the granting of additional hours.
I assume that AoN reports will, where appropriate, record that 10 + X
hours were recommended, but that only 10 will be awarded initially, and
any further hours will be subject to review?
2. Scotopic sensitivity lenses/overlays
Similarly, I had recommended a TintaVision assessment after discussion
with the same student.
SFD Darlington have declined recommendation until they "...require
evidence of the full eye test as we need to see the result of the eye
test, before we can agree to the sensitivity test. This is because we
need to establish that eye sight difficulties are associated with the
disability and not a result of poor eyesight."
I assume that students, even those with 'regular' prescription
spectacles will need to present documentary evidence of their having had
an eye test.
However, I had another student yesterday who had an eye test two years
ago and was found not to need glasses. She had not retained any
receipt, etc. I assume, again, that the SFD policy requires that she
will have to try and acquire a copy of the receipt if the optician keeps
records, or pay for a new eye test in order to get some contemporary
evidence.
Pete Lester
|