I ask because our LA has sent the draft ECHP to a grammar school for consultation but my son with SN has not taken the 11+! I am assuming that the school will just respond that they cannot accept him but I'm not sure of the rules around this. I should say that he is not anywhere near 11+ level.

It’s a moot point if you don’t think your child is suited to a grammar environment, surely?

The EHCP can name a grammar if it’s genuinely felt it can meet the child’s needs, but you’ll have to check the GS’s admission policy.

Picking one at random: BGS: “Students WHO QUALIFY and have the school named on an EHCP will take priority for places over the above admission criteria (which is looked-after, then -free-school-meals-passees, then -other stufents in cachment by distance-, then stdents out of cachement by distance)

So for BGS the child has to pass, but if then the school is named on EHCP, the child gets a place irrespective of cachement.

With an EHCp you get the right to name the best school for your child. What do you both want?

No it doesn't, but the entry criteria is different. Your son will at least get the minimum required score to be eligible for admission to the school and he will be taken regardless of the catchment requirements. If he meets the minimum threshold for all the grammers in the area then in that case he can choose.

He would not be accepted if he does not at least pass the exam. Hope this helps.

The thing to remember is that you are dealing with an entirely different bit of the law when it comes to admission to school with an EHC Plan so it is not really a question of one overriding the other. When a parent requests that a particular school is named on the EHC Plan, so long as the school is not a wholly independent school (which is not a "Section 41" school) the local authority must name that school UNLESS one or more of the exceptions listed in S 39(4) of The Children and Families Act applies. These are that:

(a) the school or other institution requested is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs of the child or young person concerned, or
(b) the attendance of the child or young person at the requested school or other institution would be incompatible with—
(i) the provision of efficient education for others, or
(ii) the efficient use of resources.


A Grammar school is likely to answer the consultation saying that the first of these exceptions applies and that the school is unsuitable to the ability and aptitude of the child if that child has not passed the 11+ and no alternative evidence of ability has been sent or is evident from the EHCP. The LA would be unlikely to name the school in these circumstances.


I am not sure why the LA would consult with a Grammar unless the parents had asked them to. However, having said that, where I work we do get consultations from the LA where they clearly are not expecting to name us as the provisions on the EHCP are ones which could not be made in a mainstream environment.

They have literally taken the 3 nearest mainstream secondary schools to our house by putting in our postcode into their website. I think because we are very close to a county border, they haven't appreciated that grammar schools in the adjacent county are fully selective, whereas the "grammar" schools in our county are not.

Anyway, the school in question have not received the consultation (yet) but have said that they would respond that as he had not taken the 11+ he would not meet the entry criteria.



I only wish it was as simple as that yoyo! It all comes down to costs sadly. We want him to stay where he is but the LA want to move him to a cheaper mainstream school.

The EHCP should have been amended and finalised by 15th February for secondary transfer. The LA are giving you no time to have an appeal heard if that was what you wish to do if/when they name the school. Is there a reason why they have left it so late? IPSEA or SOSSEN are both helpful if you are thinking of challenging the LA decision.

Oh yes, I know Alex. And if we wanted to move schools then I would have been all over them about that deadline. But we want to stay where we are so the onus is on them to change it (it's an all through school). I have already been to an IPSEA seminar on tribunals as I am pretty sure that is where we are heading.

Why have they delayed it? Not sure if it is ineptitude or tactics. Or a combination of both.

Oh dear. I wish you all the very best.