Hi Bryan
I think to be clear, there shouldn't be a point where the student has to
bear the cost of a BSL interpreter for a DSA assessment.
The second point; private assessment centres with fewer than 20 are not
automatically exempt from the requirements of the DDA; they could argue
that the cost of making reasonable adjustments could make their business
unviable. They would have to prove that to be the case. I think any
assessment centre sending out the message that it won't bear the costs of
supplying a BSL interpreter would be sending out an unfortunate message.
Whether it's for an assessment centre, in the supply of goods and services
to students with disabilities, the potential costs of making adjustments
should be factored into the costs and business plan of the centres and/or
companies involved.
This should create a level playing field for students across the board,
thus satisfying a positive approach to removing the potential barriers to
students in accessing higher education, and a situation where centres and
suppliers don't have any sort of comparative advantage over others, by
providing a consistently high level of service to students.
Best wishes
Chris
Bryan Jones
<[log in to unmask]
K> To
Sent by: [log in to unmask]
"Discussion list cc
for disabled
students and Subject
their support Re: BSL Interpreter costs -
staff." response to Chris Dunlop
<DIS-FORUM@JISCMA
IL.AC.UK>
08/12/2008 12:24
Please respond to
"Discussion list
for disabled
students and
their support
staff."
<DIS-FORUM@JISCMA
IL.AC.UK>
In regard to DSA and the study skills and strategies assessment. The
student is able to attend for an assessment because it is deemed that they
are eligible for DSA. The student in effect pays for their assessment and
this is funded through the grant that they can apply for - the DSA NMH
allowance. The DSA NMH allowance is used to provide the student with the
funding to meet the additional costs that they would not have otherwise
have incurred but for them embarking upon a higher level course.
Therefore, the additional cost of a Sign Language Interpreter at the
assessment, that they are paying for, is also something that should be
funded / reimbursed to them. On the other hand, provision of a SLI at the
assessment could deemed to be a reasonable adjustment that the Assessment
Centre is expected to make, in which case the extension of this argument is
that such provision as a SLI and the cost of should be also be an
expectation of the student’s university and not an additional cost that the
student is expected to incur. But as we know this is not what happens
because when determining what is reasonable the “grants or loans likely to
be available to disabled students” is something that institutions take into
account. See example below from the DDA COP.
Also, if Assessment Centres are expected to bear the cost of SLI provision
there is the point made about a supplier with fewer than 20 employees being
exempt from this requirement. Private sector assessment centres without
exception, as far as I aware, employ less than 20 employees, so in effect
this would mean we would have the anomaly that private sector assessment
centres, would be able to levy an additional charge to cover the cost of an
SLI at assessment interview while the institution based centres (often
operating as specific cost centre entities within their institutions) could
not. While at the same time the students teaching depts, often of the same
institution as the assessment centre, could expect the student to use their
DSA grant to pay for SLI provision. I would therefore suggest that the
funding logic is that assessment centres can charge the cost of a SLI to
the students DSA just in the same way as the student’s university will do
so following the recommendation of that same provision.
Example 6.8A
A deaf student on a degree course has been assessed as needing a sign
language interpreter for all her lectures and seminars. It is
unlikely to be reasonable to expect the university to fund an
interpreter if the student has the resources for this through her
Disabled Students’ Allowances.
Bryan Jones,
Manager, Disability Support Services
& North London Regional Access Centre,
Middlesex University
Tel: 020 8411 5366
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of amanda kent
Sent: 07 December 2008 19:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: BSL Interpreter costs - response to Chris Dunlop
Dear Chris,
I am puzzled by your reply. Are you saying that the cost of a BSL interpreter for assistive technology training is
not something that the student can claim through the DSA?
There is a difference between delivery/set-up and the training. The delivery costs (including the set-up
explanation) are in the Equipment section of the DSA but the training is in Non-Medical Helper section.
Furthermore, the equipment supplier and the training supplier are not necessarily one and the same.
I agree that the DSA should not be used to underwrite the costs or legal obligations of suppliers but this should
be seen in the context of the DSA as funding used to relieve the student of legitimate additional costs that arise
within the context of higher education.
The Code of Practice on Rights of Access indicates that there are circumstances where additional charges are
permissible. It says on p 168:
“10.49 A service provider can justify providing a service on different terms, including charging a disabled person
more for some services than it charges other people in certain circumstances. These are where the service is
individually tailored to the requirements of the disabled customer. If a higher charge or other difference in terms
reflects the additional cost or expense of meeting the disabled person's specification, then that would justify the
higher charge. “
(Code on Rights of Access:
http://83.137.212.42/sitearchive/drc/library/publications/services_and_transport/code_of_practice_rights_of_ac.html
)
The assistive technology training is surely ‘individually tailored’? The concept of the tailor-made and bespoke
training plan and delivery seems to be an underlying principle in the IT training section of ‘Completing SLC DSA
Assessment of Need’ document on the DSAQAG website.
(See http://www.dsa-qag.org.uk/content.asp?ContentID=77 , pp 16- 18)
The strategies approach in the ‘Completing SLC DSA reports’ guide seems to me to include the assumption that
equipping the student means both kit and appropriate training. From a strategies point of view, the BSL interpreter
plays an essential role in facilitating a learning development plan - they provide access to a detailed level of
information exchange and this is achievable due to specialist skills on the part of the interpreter, skills
employed to meet the needs of the particular student.
The DSA Guidance Chapter for 2008-09 suggests that if equipment is provided for the exclusive use of the student
and/or the associated support (in this case training) is specialised, the cost is DSA-able.
134 “The following principles could be used to decide if the support is appropriate for DSA funding when it is
unclear if the funding should be met from the DSAs or the institution’s own funding allocation:
the support in question is not provided by the institution for all other students; and
the equipment is provided for use exclusively by the disabled student.”
135 “DSAs may be used only where a student is obliged by reason of his disability to incur costs in receiving
specialised individual support.. “
(DSA Guidance:
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/studentsupport/administrators/dsp_section_115.shtml )
The Code of Practice Post-16 education suggests that if DSA funds are available, then the HEI does not meet the
costs:
5.48 “Some disabled students following higher education courses will be eligible for Disabled Students’ Allowances,
the specific purpose of which is to pay for additional aids and services which students require because of a
disability. It would not be reasonable to expect an education provider to pay for the same aids and services for
which Disabled Students’ Allowances are available.”
(Post 16 Code: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publicationsandresources/Disability/Pages/Education.aspx )
Using the sources above as a guide, I would conclude that BSL costs for training are DSA-able. From what you say
though Chris, it looks like I am wrong; I would be interested to know why. It is possible that I am confusing or
conflating Parts 3 and 4 of DDA. Also I have a preference for referring to Codes of Practice because they are
easier to understand but of course they do not carry the same weight as the actual legislation; my points could be
countered using a more general rule of law approach. Furthermore, it is possible that my preference for a
real-world orientated strategies approach to the DSA is obscuring my understanding of an alternative position, a
position that argues that the trainer should have anticipated the need to provide a BSL interpreter as part of the
service delivery.
Amanda Kent
DSA assessor
From:
Christopher Dunlop <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:
Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
Date:
Fri, 5 Dec 2008 08:56:41 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Hi Amanda
Just a short reply to this, as it seems that Erin has resolved the issue.
A supplier with fewer than 20 employees may be able to argue that the costs
to deliver products and services to all in the community make it an
unbearable business cost.
DSA is indeed there to support students with disabilities and additional
needs through University; it's not there to underwrite the costs of
suppliers, or underwrite the duty of suppliers in fulfilling their legal
obligations.
Best wishes
Chris
*******************************************************************************************************
The information from the Student Loans Company Ltd contained in this e-mail is private and privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error be advised that any use is strictly prohibited. Please notify us and delete the message from your computer. You may not copy or forward it or use or disclose its contents to any other person.
As internet communications are capable of data corruption it may be inappropriate to rely on advice or opinions contained in an e-mail without obtaining written confirmation of it. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses, however we do not accept any liability or responsibility for resultant virus infection. Opinions and views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and may not reflect the opinions and views of The Student Loans Company Limited.
The Student Loans Company Ltd registered office is at 21 St Thomas Street, Bristol, BS1 6JS and it is registered in England Company No. 02401034, VAT No. 556 4352 32.
********************************************************************************************************
|
