13 March 2026

The Government has published its long-awaited plans for reforming the system for supporting children and young people with SEND. The proposed changes are set out in a document called ‘SEND Reform: Putting children and young people first’.

“Getting the right support should never be a battle – it should be a given.” - Sir Keir Starmer, Government press release, 23 February 2026

These were the words of the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on the day the Government’s plans were published. It’s impossible to disagree! But will these reforms make it easier or harder for children and young people to get the special educational provision and support they need?

We would really like to believe that what’s proposed will make the system work better for children and young people and families. The aspirations are good: earlier support, more inclusive schools.

But it’s very important to get behind the headlines and dig a little deeper into how it would all work and how the law might change. And having done that, we are concerned about what the proposed changes mean for the future of vital legal protections.

What is the ‘rights-based framework’? And why does it matter?

Disabled children have a legal right to an education. But we shouldn’t take this for granted. This right has only been in existence since 1981, when Parliament passed the Education Act 1981. When we talk about a ‘rights-based’ legal framework, it means that:

• Children and young people have the right to an assessment of their individual needs;
• They have the right to the provision required to meet these needs;
• The special educational provision they receive should lead to clear expected outcomes;
• They have the right to attend a suitable education placement where the necessary special educational provision can be made.

It also means that decisions about individual children and young people must be made on the basis of what they need, not on what is already available in their local area.

Further, it means there is a clear route of redress for families when the wrong decisions are made. The SEND Tribunal adjudicates on appeals about needs assessments, EHC plans and education placements, and it applies the law.

Does the law need to change to make the SEND system work better for children and young people?

No-one thinks that the system for supporting children and young people with SEND is working as it should. But as we and others have said many times, the existence of the law is not the thing that’s stopping them getting the support in education they need. What’s stopping that happening is the prevalence of poor local decision-making, with no negative consequences for decision-makers – only for the children and young people who depend on them.

It is possible to make the SEND system work better without weakening children and young people’s legal protections. And it isn’t just IPSEA and the ‘Save Our Children’s Rights’ campaign saying that! The cross-party Education Select Committee made exactly the same point in their report last autumn on ‘Solving the SEND crisis’. Helen Hayes, the Labour MP who chairs the committee, said at the time:

“Meaningful reform of the SEND system is possible and deliverable.” 

It is possible and deliverable not by unpicking vital legal protections, but by prioritising genuine accountability.

If schools become more inclusive and a greater number of children have their special educational needs met without requiring specialist provision, the number of EHC plans, requests for special school placements and appeals to the Tribunal may be expected to fall naturally.

Are the reforms “a radical expansion in rights”?

Government ministers say that their plans represent “a radical expansion in rights for children with SEND”.  But we don’t see how this can be the case. Just saying that something is so, doesn’t make it so. The reality is that it’s a move away from the right to individually-based support and towards nationally-defined ‘packages’.

What the Department for Education seems to mean is that mainstream schools would acquire a series of new legal duties – including the duty to provide an Individual Support Plan (ISP) for every child with SEND.

The problem, though, is that a school having a duty to put in place a plan isn’t at all the same thing as a child having the right to receive specified provision. It isn’t clear at this point how ISPs could be enforced, or what parents could do if they were concerned that their child’s ISP didn’t reflect or meet their needs.

The proposed reforms risk weakening:

• The right to provision based on an individual child’s assessed needs, through a shift to standardised Specialist Provision Packages (SPPs) into which individual children may not easily fit. This is in contrast to the Secretary of State’s assertion that the reforms move away from a “one size fits all” system. It appears, in fact, that the reverse is true.
• The right to enforceable provision, as children potentially move from legally binding EHC plans to Individual Support Plans (ISPs) that appear to have no enforcement mechanism.
• The right to an EHC needs assessment and EHC plan, with unclear thresholds and restricted to children and young people with undefined ‘complex needs’, creating gaps in the system through which children may fall.
• The right for parents to request and secure a specific school placement, with greater scope for local authorities to refuse a requested placement on cost grounds, and the removal of the SEND Tribunal’s power to name a school or college. The risk is that the number of children without a suitable school place may increase under these proposals, resulting in more children and young people ending up without an education. The proposal that the Tribunal be restricted to requiring local authorities to reconsider a decision on school/college placement – rather than ordering a particular school/college to be named – may have unintended consequences. The Tribunal currently has the power to require a local authority to reconsider a decision it has made – but it rarely if ever exercises this power, because of the risk of extending delays in children and young people receiving the provision they require.
• The right to provision for children and young people outside mainstream settings, including children receiving education other than at school (EOTAS), young people in post-16 training, and those in alternative provision or youth custody.

What happens now?

The law remains the law! – nothing has changed. Local authorities cannot decide to anticipate reform by changing local policies in a way that is inconsistent with existing law.

These are not finalised plans, and the Government is inviting anyone with an interest in the subject to share their views on what is proposed. The public consultation is open until 18 May, and you can find details here on how to have your say.

IPSEA will of course be providing a detailed response to the consultation. Our main message will be that legally enforceable protections for children and young people can’t be replaced by reassurances that schools and colleges will provide what they need. SEND legal rights must remain as a backstop, no matter how much mainstream schools and colleges improve for children and young people with SEND – as everyone hopes they will.

About the author

Catriona is responsible for IPSEA’s work in bringing about change by influencing the development of SEND policy nationally. Her background is in public policy and communications, and she has worked for a number of charities and public sector organisations, as well as in Parliament. In the past she has served as an elected councillor in a London borough, a special school governor and a charity trustee. She has personal experience of having a disabled child. In her spare time, she enjoys walking, reading, going to the theatre and being by the sea.

Explore more of our latest policy blogs here.