Jennifer Wright, Associate Solicitor, Rook Irwin Sweeney & Beth Parr, Solicitor, Rook Irwin Sweeney

On 11 June 2025 the Government announced plans to substantially reform the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) system in England. The detail of these proposals were published in the February 2026 White Paper “Every child achieving and thriving” and accompanying consultation documents, and represent the most significant overhaul of the SEND system since the Children and Families Act 2014. This article outlines some of the key proposals, and explains their potential impact on children and young people with SEND if they are taken forwards by the government.

It is important to note that the law hasn’t yet changed and they are only proposals at this stage. The earliest changes to Education, Health and Care (‘EHC’) needs assessments are proposed to take effect from September 2029, with no changes to the support received via Education Health and Care Plans (‘EHCPs’) before September 2030. Until new legislation comes into force, the existing SEND system and the rights linked to it will continue.

Whilst some proposals – particularly those focusing on early identification and intervention and staff training – have been welcomed, there is widespread concern that the reforms overall would dilute important existing legal rights and reduce accountability of local authorities. These are some of the major changes proposed:

Introduction of Individual Support Plans (ISPs)

A new legal duty would require schools and colleges to produce an ISP for every child or young person with SEND (including children with EHCPs), replacing the current system of “SEN Support”. The ISP would outline their needs and the day-to-day provision they require. ISPs would be developed and owned by the school/college, and reviewed by them annually.

Whilst this may sound like a positive step, it is understood there would not be any accompanying legal duty requiring schools to actually deliver the provision set out within an ISP. This is an important distinction because at the moment there is a specific duty on local authorities to secure all provision set out in Section F of an EHCP (although it is proposed that this duty would shift to schools under the new reforms). ISPs would therefore not have the same legal enforceability as provision contained in EHCPs.

Parents of children with ISPs would also have no right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal regarding the content of the plans. Where provision in an ISP is not delivered, the primary remedy would be simply to make a complaint against the school/college, with escalation to an independent panel thereafter if needed.

EHCPs for children with “complex needs” only

Whilst the Government is proposing to retain EHCPs alongside the new ISPs, this would only be for children and young people with the ‘most complex needs’.

“Most complex needs” is not defined in the White Paper, but it seems that the current threshold for obtaining an EHCP would be raised, meaning that children that would meet the criteria for an EHCP today may not meet that criteria in the future.

This is important as without an EHCP, children and young people will be left only with an ISP, which is not legally enforceable and cannot be appealed to Tribunal.

EHCPs would also look radically different. At the moment, EHCPs are required to specify and quantify the individualised provision that the child or young person requires to meet their needs. Under the proposals, this individualised approach will be replaced with standardised and pre-defined packages.

The Government plans to create seven broad specialist support packages (SPPs), each covering a different category of need. Children would then be given access to one (or possibly more) of these seven SPPs through their EHCP. The individualised provision that is currently set out in section F of an EHCP would instead be put into the (unenforceable and unappealable) ISP that is prepared by the school.

Concerns have been raised by campaigners that by only using these broad and pre-determined packages, children would no longer be able to access the bespoke, tailored provision designed to meet their individual needs, as is presently the case.

No Annual Reviews of EHCPs

It is currently proposed that rather than having annual reviews of an EHCP, that reviews would only take place at the end of a key stage (except in respect of early years and post-16). This will potentially leave parents and young people without any effective legal rights of redress where changes are needed to provision or placements between the transitions to key stages.

Choosing a placement

It is proposed that only children with an EHCP would be able to attend a specialist setting; all other children would attend mainstream settings, with access to improved support bases. Given that it appears that the threshold for obtaining an EHCP would be raised, there may be many children currently in special schools with an EHCP, who may not be eligible for an EHCP/specialist setting in the future.

The proposals do not set out what would happen for children who currently require special educational provision at home, for example through an Education Other Than In a School or College (EOTIS) package.

Even where a child does have an EHCP, the proposals limit the powers for parents to choose the school/college which is named in the EHCP. A list of recommended settings that can deliver the child’s allocated SPP would be given to parents, though they may request an alternative setting. Local authorities must consider parental preference, but can still rely on legal exceptions to refuse to name the preferred setting. Crucially, they can now refuse to name a high-cost placement where this would otherwise affect their ability to meet the needs of other local children, meaning that local authorities could take their wider resources into account when naming a school in an EHCP.

Weakened Tribunal powers

Significantly weaker powers are proposed for the SEND Tribunal, limiting opportunities to challenge provision or placement.

The Tribunal would no longer be able to order that a specific school be named in an EHCP. Instead, it would be able only to assess whether a local authority’s placement decision was reasonable, and if not, quash the decision and direct that it be remade by the local authority.

Concerns have been raised by campaigners that this risks creating a cycle of an inappropriate setting being named by the local authority, that decision being quashed upon appeal, and another inappropriate setting then being named again.

Broader appeal rights relating to provision would also be weakened as a result of:

– EHCPs no longer being reviewed annually and only at the end of key stages (which means parents’ rights of appeal would arise much less frequently); and

– EHCPs no longer containing individual bespoke provision for each child, but being based on the seven pre-determined support packages, which means the Tribunal would not be able to direct more specific or individualised support for each child

Conclusion

If enacted the proposals would drastically reshape how support is delivered to children with SEND in England, and will significantly reduce legal rights.

It should be noted that a judicial review claim has also recently been issued alleging that the government’s consultation on the reforms is unlawful including because it fails to fully explain the changes to legal rights and Tribunal powers to consultees and asks no specific questions about this. Depending on the outcome of that judicial review, the process of consultation and the timescales for implementation may change.