There does not seem to be any indication of which schools/Local Education Authority were involved other than they are likely to have been in the catchment area for the Bath CFS Service, one of the schools was an all girls state school and a Larry Cunningham was involved in liaising with the schools. If as claimed neither Bristol University and the Bath service have the relevant paper work, in what format was Proff Crawley's instructions to the schools about what to include in the letters to parents/guardians, and would a freedom of information request to the schools/LEA be feasible. [There is an all girls state school in Bath itself, though it is an academy which will impact on any role the LEA might have played and has a mixed sixth form.]
I'd like them to describe the service being delivered. Surely service evaluation has to actually name the service being delivered. What is that service? And how does it relate to the actual evaluation? Of course it doesn't help that it was published under research. Sometimes the devil is in the details. Sometimes the devil doesn't bother with that and just slaps the contradictory label himself because he knows nobody holds him accountable or care about those "non-patients" with imaginary complaints.
Of course that's one of the ridiculous things here. This was a pilot effort. So how could it have been service evaluation? There was no existing "service" to be evaluated.
The quickest way to find out who has these documents would be to ask Crawley herself who has them. It would be fascinating to have her reply that she doesn't know. Of course the request cant come from David Tuller as that would be "harassment".
In my professional experience, all children with chronic health problems and 'fatigue" would have to go first to a pediatrician, ( sometimes the 'school doctor'/ community paediatician before any other statutory services ( including specialist ME and CFS Clinics) would accept the referral. Likewise for Alternative Education, Pupil Referral Units have the community paediatricians coming into the unit and also into mainstream schools. The LEA will more often not accept requests for home tuition unless the community paediatrician is willing to endorse it. Likewise Educational Welfare staff and school new shiny 'attendance" officers. Or "newly named 'Local Offer Brokers"!!!!! School,nurses if they still exist, will bow to the community paediatric service....... So people like EC are all powerful and will have a defined captive audience. New on the scene since 2010 are Parent Carer Organsations tasked with doing the LEA bidding on Alternative Provision for children with complex needs https://www.bristolparentcarers.org.uk/ often, sick kids are treated as an afterthought, or what Bristol Commissioning team call ' Pushed out " learners!!!!,...... https://www.bristol.gov.uk/documents/20182/239212/Commissioning+Plan+-+Meeting+the+needs+of+‘pushed+out’+learners+-+March+2016/d3a625a5-c0a6-4039-b95f-7e5a8d2b693b https://www.bristol.gov.uk/schools-learning-early-years/alternative-learning-provision. Alternative Learning Provision The Alternative Learning Provision (formerly the Pupil Referral Service) is for pupils who can’t attend mainstream educational settings. The service is made up of: Lansdown Park Secondary Specialist Provision St Matthias Park Pupil Referral Unit Bristol Hospital Education Service The Educated Otherwise/Alternative Learning Provision Hub commissions alternative provision from a range of alternative providers. Alternative Learning Provision The Alternative Learning Provision (formerly the Pupil Referral Service) is for pupils who can’t attend mainstream educational settings. The service is made up of: Lansdown Park Secondary Specialist Provision St Matthias Park Pupil Referral Unit Bristol Hospital Education Service The Educated Otherwise/Alternative Learning Provision Hub commissions alternative provision from a range of alternative providers.
thanks for the various suggestions. So which would be the local education agency to which I would send a freedom of information request?
Can someone ask Esther on twitter who to send the FOI as she should know which agency holds this information?
What I find astonishing here, is that nobody seems to be accountable for holding archived records of this information? It's not like it's receipts from when they nipped out to buy lunch; it's critical documentation from a clinical study! Are there really no regulations or guidelines to regulate retention of such data? If they are effectively admitting such data has been lost, then what the heck is going on? It's ludicrous. Is it maybe in breach of some regulation? I hope so.
This is the Local Education Authority School Attendance dept for Bath where I think the FOI needs to go: https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services...arers-educational/children-missing-educatio-7 But if any Academies were included in the study you may need to contact them directly @dave30th
I hope this is a joke. No one should approach Professor Crawley on behalf of anything having to do with me. I hope that is clear to everyone.
No, silly - it's just a pilot for a new service no need to keep records (.....the tongue in cheek is obvious, I hope? ) also -
MRC Regulatory Support Centre: Retention framework for research data and records https://mrc.ukri.org/documents/pdf/retention-framework-for-research-data-and-records/ Not sure if this is relevant or useful, and of course it relates to research, which of course the investigator's claim their study to not be. But thought I drop it in here in case of use.
The first thing I would try is to send an email to both FOI departments, copying the responses you have received and saying something like: To both parties, As you can see (below) I have made requests to both authorities and each has said the other is responsible. I wonder if you could please assist me by saying which in fact was the responsible authority for the trial and which would then be the one who would hold the information. Thank you for your help. Yours sincerely, Incidentally I would never use the term 'vexatious' in a request. If I think there is a likelihood that the vexatiousness exemption may be claimed then I would give the reasons for the request, but without actually using the word.
I wonder if it is worth writing to the local education authorities in the area (who used to run the schools most will now be independent) for example Bath and North east Somerset https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/schools-colleges-and-learning https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services...cracy/data-protection-and-freedom-information information_governance@bathnes.gov.uk South Gloucester Which is part of bristol http://www.southglos.gov.uk/education-and-learning/schools-and-education/ FoI Information: http://www.southglos.gov.uk/council...tion/making-a-freedom-of-information-request/ freedomofinformation@southglos.gov.uk Bristol https://www.bristol.gov.uk/schools-learning-early-years FoI information https://www.bristol.gov.uk/data-protection-foi/freedom-of-information-foi https://www.bristol.gov.uk/foi-request
Given my experience they don't even offer a service at the required legal level for home education and they may agree to other things such as online education but won't deliver.