As another eventful year draws to a close, it may be a good time to take stock of where we are in terms of the future of the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and alternative provision (AP) system. It seems safe to refer to it in this way as, so far, the previous government’s move to combine SEND and AP into a single system seems likely to remain. The fate of the rest of the SEND and alternative provision improvement plan (SENDAP IP) remains less clear

Governments are often keen to scrap, rebadge or amend policies put in place by a previous government. As the general election took place in the middle of the two-year timescale, otherwise known as the SEND and alternative provision roadmap), during which the proposed changes are being tested, this is continuing into next year. What happens after that is largely unknown territory.
 

The Change Programme

The Change Programme has seen the setting up of a change programme partnership (CPP) in each region, so that the 32 lead and supporting local authorities (LA), together with integrated care boards (ICB) and other partners, can test the reforms.

So far, nearly all the local areas have:

• drafted local area inclusion plans (LAIP)

• tested the national education, health and care plan (EHCP) template in its digitised format

• established multi-agency panels (MAP) where they didn’t already exist, and

• strengthened mediation.
   

In addition:

• 17 have implemented or embedded the three-tier AP model

• the Early Language Support for Every Child (ELSEC) programme is live in all 12 pathfinder sites, and

• 24 have established an alternative provision specialist taskforce (APST).
   

Much of this information comes from the Reaching Excellence and Ambition for All Children (REACh) consortium newsletters. After a slight hiatus during the change of government, these newsletters are continuing to provide updates on how the proposed changes are progressing.

In November, the following statement was made in parliament: “The work of the Change Programme continues to provide valuable insights and learning across the SEND & AP system. This includes informing the Department’s thinking about effective inclusive mainstream practice.”  

One thing that has become increasingly clear is the drive to tackle the SEND crisis by increasing SEND provision in mainstream schools, including through having more SEN units and resourced provision.

 

Making mainstream more inclusive

In a press release on 4 December 2024, secretary of state for education Bridget Phillipson wrote:

“My commitment to reform – making tangible changes to the SEND system to improve experiences for children and families – could not be clearer and building a system where more children with SEND can attend mainstream schools is central to our plans.”

Few would argue that if a pupil can benefit from a mainstream curriculum and environment, then that is where they should be, but this shouldn’t be seen as a way of solving the whole of the SEND crisis. 

SEN units and resourced provisions

Although SEN units and resourced provisions have been around for years, there is a lack of guidance about how they should be run, who they should be for, and the differences between these two types of provision. Whereas units generally imply a separate class where pupils with SEN or with a specific type of need spend varying lengths of time, LAs can designate a whole school as being resourced, for example, for physically impaired pupils.

In January 2024, there were 392 schools in England with SEN units and 1,168 schools with a resourced provision. Where these have been carefully planned, with specialist staff and appropriate accommodation, they have worked well.

Funding

At the beginning of December 2024, it was announced that a £740 cash injection would help mainstream schools adapt classrooms to make them more accessible for children with SEND, and also to create specialist facilities so that more intensive support can be provided.

SEND advisers and a neurodivergence task and finish group

As part of the drive to make mainstream schools more inclusive for pupils with SEND, Bridget Phillipson has appointed two SEND advisers:

• Dame Christine Lenehan, former director of the Council for Disabled Children (CDC), has been made strategic advisor on SEND. Her role is to advise ministers on the next steps for the future of SEND. She is due to engage the sector, including leaders, practitioners, children and families in this work.

• Tom Rees, CEO of Ormiston Academies Trust, will lead an expert advisory group to help drive forward the government’s work on inclusion in mainstream education.
   

The education secretary has also established a neurodivergence task and finish group under the chairmanship of Professor Karen Guldberg, who is the director of the Autism Centre for Education and Research (ACER) and Head of the School of Education, University of Birmingham.

Karen Guldberg writes: “Our focus will be to advise and make recommendations regarding the best ways to support and meet the educational needs of neurodivergent children and young people in mainstream settings.”

At the time of writing, membership of this panel and of Tom Rees’s expert advisory group has yet to be confirmed.

Outreach

Although the emphasis on mainstream provision is clear, Bridget Phillipson hasn’t ignored special schools. Indeed, she has said that there is “more that could be shared between specialist and mainstream provision because there is some fantastic work going on within the specialist sector that I think staff working in the mainstream settings would find really useful in terms of their training and development.” 

When I read the improvement plan, I was disappointed to find that while the importance of outreach work from AP was quite rightly highlighted, there was no mention of outreach work from special schools, which some of us were engaged in from the 1980s onwards. This seemed to me to be a missed opportunity. 

 

Ofsted Changes    

It is, perhaps, a fortuitous coincidence that this year has seen a change of His Majesty's chief inspector of education, children's services and skills (HMCI) as well as a change of government, with both saying that they want to listen more, to work more in partnership with those affected by the decisions they make, and to be open to new ideas.

Following the launch in March 2024 of The Big Listen, which received over 20,000 responses including around 4,300 from children, in September 2024 Ofsted published its consultation outcome, entitled Hearing feedback, accepting criticism and building a better Ofsted: the response to the Big Listen. One senior HMI told me that having to read through people’s responses had been ‘cathartic’.

Report cards and inspecting inclusion

A consultation early in 2025 is expected to include new frameworks for inspecting schools and area SEND inspections. In addition, the consultation is expected to include questions about what report cards should look like – we already we know that these are expected to provide information about how inclusion will be inspected.

To assist Ofsted, the National Children’s Bureau (NCB) has been commissioned to research and publish its findings on:

• how vulnerability is currently understood in the education and social care sectors, and 
• how Ofsted can better understand vulnerability and its complexity, so that inclusive practice can be assessed when inspecting or regulating in both the education and social care sectors.
  ​

Read the terms of reference for this research.

From January 2025 to April 2026, regional improvement for standards and excellence (RISE) teams will work with schools in need of support. In the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, the RISE teams are mentioned as another way of supporting school improvement.

Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) latest thematic review

This year’s review by Ofsted and the CQC looked at how young people are being prepared for adulthood. Preparation for adulthood arrangements in local areas: a thematic review, was published on 16 December 2024. The four sections of the report cover:

• employment

• independent living

• community inclusion, and

• health.
   

The recommendations are aimed at: government departments; NHS England; local authorities and local area partnerships; as well as one recommendation for schools and colleges.

 

Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR)

All credit to the government for setting in train a much-needed and long overdue curriculum and assessment review, soon after being elected. Professor Becky Francis CBE has been named as review chair, and the review panel includes Gary Aubin, who has been selected for his expertise in SEND.

In talking about the review, Bridget Phillipson said it will look particularly at those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged or who have SEND. She has talked of it as breathing “new life into our outdated curriculum and assessment system” and ends by saying that “the review will seek evolution not revolution.”

The problem is that revolution may be exactly what is needed, particularly for those who, for whatever reason, find it more of a struggle to learn. The last thing these pupils need is to be faced with a treadmill of tests at primary level and an over-emphasis on how many GCSEs they can muster at secondary. We are told that:

“Last year, only 20% of pupils with SEND met the expected standard in reading, writing and maths at Key Stage 2 level, and that without the right support, children are falling behind their peers.” (Government press release, 4 December 2024).

In this sentence, the phrase ‘expected standard’ is mentioned and concern is expressed that 20% of pupils with SEND don’t reach it. It is then implied that children are ‘falling behind’ because they are not getting the right support, which in part may certainly be true. But there seems to be no allowance for children developing at different rates, having different abilities, or other barriers to learning. This is why ‘evolution’ may not be enough.

Another debate that has arisen is whether there should be a national curriculum flexible enough to be appropriate for all pupils. Or should there be room for schemes of work, such as those from Equals, which has pathways for pupils with profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD); complex learning difficulties (CLD); severe learning difficulties (SLD); moderate learning difficulties (MLD); and global learning difficulties (GLD)?
 

Looking ahead to 2025

As I write, the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, previously known as the Children’s Wellbeing Bill, has just had its first reading. The date of the second reading hasn’t been fixed. Whether or not this leaves room for a SEND or SENDAP Bill remains to be seen!

The latest in a crop of recent publications about the crisis in SEND is the new report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), Spending on special educational needs in England: something has to change, which was published on 10 December 2024. At the end there is a section on policy options, none of which suggests a perfect solution. After mentioning the way in which the national funding formula (NFF) for schools was gradually introduced, the final sentence reads:

“The transition path to a better system may run slowly and through an accumulation of local knowledge, but it is probably better than no transition and continuing on the present path of financial unsustainability.”

At present, the government is relying on an expansion of SEN units and resourced provisions as a large part of the answer. Hopefully, this will be combined with the learning and insights from the Change Programme, as well as addressing the urgent need for more educational psychologists, specialist staff, therapists, etc., without which all types of provision will flounder.

SEND is likely to remain in the news. Hopefully, actions taken in 2025 and beyond will see it not in the news for all the wrong reasons, but for some positive steps being taken towards a more promising future.   

Season’s Greetings to you all!

Rona Tutt (18 December 2024)