What is it that needs clarification here? The priority seems to be working out
the impact of changes to the documentation and taking a no-blame practical
problem solving approach to any problems that students may encounter with
the eligibility/ evidence form-filling scenario?
There are some differences between last year’s DSA form and the 2009/10
one. This we know. (The forms for DSA 2008 and 2009 are on the directgov
website.).
Swift and Emma have pointed out the DSA application forms have changed in
terms of the way they ask for medical evidence. This may be a concern for
students in terms of actually being able to find the right person to provide this
evidence and then being sure that they have written something fit for
purpose. It may also involve cost because eg GPs are entitled to charge a fee
for the production of medical reports that fall outside their contractual terms
for NHS work. As has been mentioned on this list, HEIs may well have a guide
or template available. But where does a student who starts in 09/10 find a
guide to the production of fit for purpose evidence for DSA? Is this something
mailed out from HEIs to all known prospective disabled students? The cost of
getting the evidence – same as SpLD students? Let them know about any ALF
arrangements?
The question about date of last assessment should be read along with the
note (b) on page 24 and information about evidence p25 (as referenced
already in this thread). The form and notes do not indicate this is relevant to
SpLD students only. I can see this is an area where misunderstanding is likely
to occur and one might think this means latest blood test results or the like –
which is maybe not the intention, but of course that kind of assessment
evidence is available through doctors.
Swift and Emma’s examples demonstrates another change for students who
have already been through the DSA system (ie they are no longer asked
describe any significant changes on re-application but provide instead
previous DSA needs assessment reports, or information about where these
assessments were carried out). This is in addition to parts a) and b) of that
section. Can’t see it is too much of a problem but it does mean the student is
not cued at that stage to indicate what remains relevant and/or what is
different. That would be in the new needs assessment though.
Amanda Kent
DSA needs assessor
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:47:36 +0100, John Conway
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>At the risk of seeming to support SFE, I think from what I've heard them say
this is a mix-up in communication or muddled thinking.
>The date of last assessment does make sense in the case of an SpLD person
where it would trigger thoughts about the post-16th birthday requirement.
>In the case of the GP, I imagine they may have been thinking that some
disabilities, e.g. cancer or MS, are defined from date of diagnosis, but being
progressive conditions may not yet actually be causing any impairment [I hope
that's an acceptable word] and so would not fulfil the criteria for a Disabled
Student Allowance as there is no additional need / cost and it might be
easiest for the medic diagnosing to state in general terms, whether the
medical condition is affecting life & studying???
>Perhaps, Chris, if I am correct, some clarification could be issued on these
two points????
>
>John
>
|