On Tuesday 2 December, the Department for Education (DfE) launched “the biggest national conversation on SEND … in a generation”.
Government launches national conversation on SEND – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
The hyperbole is not missed. This is the second ‘biggest national conversation’ in 10 years, ever since the Children and Families Act 2014 made the ‘biggest change to SEND in a generation’. These generational seismic shifts seem all too frequent.
According to the DfE’s announcement, their “national conversation on SEND” aims to build a reformed SEND system “that will stand the test of time.” Key themes of proposed reform include: early intervention, more local provision, fairness (so every school has resources and capability), evidence-based effective practice, and joined-up working across education, health and care.
Some of the concrete measures include support for neurodiversity in mainstream schools, capital investment for new SEND places (reportedly 10,000 new places), more early language support, and rollout of family-hub professionals.
The official narrative is that the current SEND system is “on its knees,” with many children consistently let down and parents forced to “battle” for support — and so the government claims reform is overdue.
The issues with the DfE’s plans
Despite the rhetoric, there are many significant issues already popping up. The proposals, as currently formulated or described, risk doing real harm to families of children with SEN. Below are some of the most serious risks and shortcomings identified by experts, educators, and parent/campaigner-organisations.
- There’s still no money
According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), the SEND system has become financially unsustainable: the number of pupils with SEND — especially those with legally mandated Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) — has “rocketed” over recent years, but funding has not kept pace.
Many local authorities are massively over budget for SEND. In some councils, deficits have ballooned so alarmingly that insolvency (or at least serious financial crisis) is a real risk — especially once accounting “overrides” (which have hidden these deficits) expire.
If financial pressures remain unaddressed, this could lead to fewer resources for SEN support, increased waiting times for assessments and services, and reduced availability of specialist provision.
Critically, even if the DfE moves funding responsibility to central government (as current proposals suggest), it remains unclear how and from what budget the support will be funded — raising serious concerns that money may be diverted from mainstream school budgets or other services. The only analysis so far is that the changes risk a 4.9% reduction in per pupil funding.
For families of children with SEN, this could mean — at best — more uncertainty and inconsistency; at worst — a reduction in support, delays, or failure to deliver crucial services altogether.
- Risk of diluting legal rights and weakening safeguards
The drive to make mainstream schools more inclusive, is being pursued alongside calls (from some local authorities) to reduce the reliance on EHCPs for many children, providing support “without needing a statutory plan.”
The IFS has warned that tinkering with EHCP statutory obligations could amount to effectively reducing legal rights — calling such changes “highly controversial.”
Given that EHCPs provide a legally enforceable package of support, and secure suitable school placements, any weakening or removal of this statutory underpinning risks undermining protections that many families have relied on, leaving children with SEN more vulnerable to having their needs unmet.
For parents, this introduces a worrying possibility: support that was once guaranteed in law could become discretionary and uneven — or subject to budget constraints.
Beyond that, too, is the simple point that mainstream schools cannot simply be ‘expected’ to become more inclusive. Pupils receive EHCPs, to go to specialist schools, because the pupil cannot cope in mainstream schools. That is either because of the curriculum, the environment, the peer group, pace of learning, overwhelming natures of the place etc. etc. The seemingly simple phrase ‘making mainstream more inclusive’ belies a range of significant practical questions. Questions that could only be answered with very significant investment in schools, training, professionals, experts, and equipment.
This notion is also entirely misleading. There already is a statutory presumption for mainstream schooling, if parents want it. Labelling this drive as ‘inclusivity’ seems to a worryingly misleading attempt to ‘push’ mainstream schools beyond their capacity/ competence.
- Uneven quality of support, with mainstream inclusion overstated
Even before reforms, the quality of SEND provision under EHCPs has been widely criticised. The IFS report noted that “you cannot magic quality into existence by writing it on a legal document,” pointing to patchiness in provision: in many schools, support is delivered by poorly trained teaching assistants, children are pulled out of lessons, and there is “almost no way” of judging whether the billions spent actually deliver better outcomes.
According to a recent survey, 72 % of teachers say the current SEND system fails children. Over half believe reforms will have a negative impact on pupils with complex needs, and 67 % fear that expanding mainstream provision will happen without adequate support.
Ofsted echoes many of these concerns: in many cases EHCPs are delayed or of poor quality; health provision (e.g. CAMHS, speech therapy) often has long waiting lists; early identification and intervention are inconsistent; and many children with SEND are on part-time timetables or even out of school entirely.
For families, this suggests that even if reforms aim for more inclusion in mainstream schools, that inclusion may be superficial: children may not receive the tailored help they need, may be frequently pulled out of class, or may end up missing whole chunks of education.
- Increased burden on families: fighting for support, more instability, inequity
The DfE’s announcements do not guarantee that all families’ concerns will translate into meaningful or legally binding protections.
With potential reductions in statutory protections, rising pressure on mainstream schools, and stretched resources, parents may find themselves back in the same familiar position: having to fight for support via appeals, tribunals, private assessment, or even private provision. This replicates many of the problems that produced the broken system in the first place. Indeed, critics have described badly designed reforms as likely to become “welfare-reforms mark 2.”
There is also a risk of unequal outcomes. Families with more resources, time, or knowledge may be better able to navigate a more fragmented or discretionary system; those without may see their children’s needs ignored or unmet.
Could this hurt families?
Putting all this together: although the rhetoric of reform emphasises inclusion, fairness and early intervention, the structural and financial context means that the risks to families are very real. Without clear, guaranteed funding and legally protected rights, many children with SEN risk being left behind — or ending up in an even more adversarial, uncertain, and under-resourced system.
In essence: a “reform” could easily result in a doubling-down of the issues;
- Instead of improving support, reform might mean less support, delayed support, or support that depends on local capacity rather than legal entitlement.
- Instead of universal equity, there could be increased inequity depending on geography, school, local authority, or parental resources.
- Instead of stability, families might face instability, inconsistency, and repeated fighting to secure the minimal help their children need.
- Instead of early intervention, there might be longer waiting times, more “flexi-schooling,” and sometimes children missing out completely on education or support.
The proposed reforms to SEND, whilst mostly made up of whispers and rumour, seem to carry risks for exactly the families that most need stability, support, and certainty. Without clear and binding commitments to funding, legal protections, and service quality, there is a very real danger that the reforms will lead not to a better system, but to a broken one that is even more precarious than today’s.
It may turn out that this generational reform is nothing more than a rollback.
— — —
We routinely assist families navigate the ever complex SEN system. If you need help ensuring your child receives the education they deserve, get in touch with us:
Tel: 0333 202 7175
Email: education@hcbgroup.com