In the next few months, the government is planning to set out
major reforms to the special educational needs and disabilities
(SEND) system in England. In this new article, IFS researchers
describe the key problems with the system, before providing new
reflections on what the government will need to do to implement
its goal of providing more core SEND support within mainstream
schools.
Since 2018, the number of pupils with Education, Health and Care
Plans – legal documents guaranteeing tailored support for
individual pupils judged to have the most severe needs – has
increased by nearly 80%. Most of this rise seems to reflect
improved recognition of needs that were always there,
particularly with regards to rising identification of autism and
ADHD.
Funding has gone up by more than £4 billion since 2018, or by
more than 50% in real terms. Because Education, Health and Care
Plans create legally binding entitlements to specific inputs,
spending has gone up by even more. It is estimated that councils'
accumulated deficits will total around £8 billion by March 2027.
Unfortunately, we have almost no way of judging whether the
billions in extra funding represent value for money. There is
little centralised information on what provision Education,
Health and Care Plans cover, and we know much less than we would
like to about what programmes make a difference for children with
SEND. Most evidence suggests the quality of support available is
patchy.
The government has stated that it wants to provide more core
support within mainstream schools. In principle, this could
provide higher-quality support at lower long-run cost. However,
doing this well will likely require an increase in supply-side
capacity, proper accountability on quality and outcomes, and a
change in attitudes.
Luke Sibieta, IFS Research Fellow and co-author of the
briefing, said:
‘The SEND system in England is broken and reform is long overdue.
The system is not financially sustainable and there is almost no
way to judge whether the £4 billion increase in funding since
2018 represents value for money.
‘Principled reform to address these challenges is needed. But any
reforms are likely to generate controversy. If the focus is on
reducing legal rights to cut short-term costs, this could easily
turn into welfare reforms mark 2. This is avoidable. The focus
should be on the longer-term prize of designing a system that
works well for children, families, schools and the public
finances To do so, the government needs to focus on increasing
supply-side capacity.
‘This could be expensive. But the status quo isn't free either.
The previous government never set out to increase spending on
SEND by over £4 billion or 50% – it just drifted into it. If that
money had been invested in a coherent transformation of
provision, the system would be in far better shape today.
Policymakers cannot afford to miss the opportunity again.'
