There’s a great deal of uncertainty within the SEND world at present, as we all await the SEND White Paper. With the Government having signified its plan to reform the SEND system by focusing on mainstream inclusion, without being able to provide any concrete reassurance on the continuation of EHC plans, many will have welcomed the recently published inquiry report from the Education Committee. Of particular significance is their recommendation that, whilst there is an urgent need to resolve the unsustainable pressure on the SEND system, reforms must not be based on withdrawing statutory entitlements. In other words, scrapping EHC plans is not the answer.

Below, we reflect on this and other key inquiry findings in relation to EHCPs as a critical safeguard and why improving mainstream provision must not come at the cost of statutory entitlements.

SEND system pressures

The report acknowledges the growing pressures within the system due to rising need, including ‘a variety of challenges around capacity, support, teacher preparedness, multi‑agency collaboration and local authority finances’ (p.22). In our work supporting Local Authorities (LAs) with writing plans and training SEND officers, we regularly see how these challenges can compound, leaving both families and LA SEND teams in distress.

The rising number of EHC plans (an increase of 102% since 2016) is a significant contributory factor, and the report observes that ‘Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans are increasingly being used to fill the gaps left by insufficient SEN support and inadequate ordinarily available provision, where parents feel that their children’s needs are not being met and applying for an EHCP is the only way to ‘unlock’ the support they need.’ (p.42)

Like many of the LAs we support, we believe that improving mainstream inclusion is necessary, but that effort must not come by weakening access to EHCPs, which remain essential. The report describes how EHCPs are critical because they ‘provide a legally binding framework that sets out the support a child or young person is entitled to receive’ and ensure accountability (p.42).

Inclusive education, in practice

The Education Committee welcomes the Government’s proposed focus on inclusive education, but also notes several critical gaps (p.24), including:

• The absence of a Departmental definition of ‘inclusive education’
• Lack of clarity about what inclusive education looks like and means in practice
• Lack of understanding about the timescale and investment that would be needed to achieve a truly inclusive mainstream education system

The Committee acknowledges that there is potential for more needs to be met within SEN Support, but only if that support is clearly defined, properly funded and consistently applied across schools. The report recommends that the Government publishes ‘statutory requirements mandating the minimum resources, specialist expertise, and equipment that every educational setting must have access to as part of their offer of SEN support and in order to deliver an inclusive education’ (p.39).

We support this approach, as long as EHC plans remain in place for those with needs that require more individualised, specialist and long-term support.

System-wide accountability

The Committee rightly warns against scaling back EHCP access without fixing the broader system first, stating that ‘current levels of EHC plans are unsustainable; however, the solution to this cannot be to remove the statutory entitlements from a system which lacks accountability in many other areas and in which parents already have so little trust and confidence’ (p.46).

Many families feel they have no choice but to fight for plans, due to inconsistent SEN Support. However, reducing EHCPs in this climate would not solve the crisis, but simply push more children into unmet need. The Committee therefore recommends that ‘SEND reforms must not be based on any withdrawal of statutory entitlements for children and young people with SEND’ (p.46).

While we agree that better SEN support can reduce unnecessary plan applications, we also agree that statutory rights must not be undermined. Inclusion must be a complement to, not a substitute for, legally backed specialist support.

Looking ahead

The coming White Paper will shape the future of SEND provision. Reform should reflect the Committee’s view: improve inclusion, but not by weakening the statutory protections that children and young people rely upon.