Everything you need to know about Education, Health and Care Plans

You (or your school) request an EHC needs assessment in writing from your local authority's SEND team, citing Section 36 of the Children and Families Act 2014. You do not need the school to agree, and you do not need a diagnosis. Include evidence of unmet need: school reports, professional reports, and your own observations of how your child is coping at home.

Yes. This is one of the most common misconceptions. The legal test is whether your child has special educational needs that may call for provision through an EHCP, not whether they hold a formal diagnosis of autism, ADHD or anything else. Unmet need is what matters.

A refusal to assess is appealable to the SEND Tribunal, and you have two months from the decision to register. Refusals at this stage are common and frequently overturned. Strengthen the case with clear evidence of need and the gap between what your child requires and what is currently provided.

Yes. A refusal to issue a plan after assessment is a separate appealable decision, again within two months. Many families succeed at this stage by showing that SEN support alone cannot meet the child's needs.

A strong EHCP has a Section B that captures every need and a Section F that specifies provision precisely: who delivers it, how often, for how long, and to what standard. If Sections B and F are vague or use phrases like "access to" or "as appropriate", the plan is likely unenforceable and should be amended.

Section F must be specific and quantified. It should name the type of provision, the amount (for example, hours of 1:1 support per week), the frequency, and who is responsible. Avoid vague wording. "Access to" support is not the same as a specified, enforceable entitlement.

It depends on need, not diagnosis. If your child cannot access learning, stay safe, or regulate without adult support, 1:1 provision may be appropriate and should be quantified in Section F. The evidence has to show why the support is necessary and how much is required.

Placement is decided through Section I of the EHCP. You can express a preference for a special school, and the LA must name it unless it is unsuitable, incompatible with the efficient education of others, or an inefficient use of resources. Strong evidence that mainstream cannot meet need is key.

You can request an independent or non-maintained special school. The LA must consider it and, where it is suitable and other conditions are met, can be required to fund it. Cost alone is not an automatic reason to refuse; the LA must compare genuinely suitable options.

The right setting depends on your child's profile, not the label. For PDA in particular, low-arousal, flexible, relationship-based environments often work better than highly structured demand-led settings. The EHCP should describe the environment and approach your child needs so that Section I names a setting that can deliver it.

Gather evidence that shows the gap between what is provided and what is needed: independent professional reports (for example, an Educational Psychologist), a clear record of incidents and absences, work samples, and your own chronology. The question is not whether the school is trying, but whether need is actually being met.

A well-evidenced independent EP report can be one of the most valuable pieces of evidence, particularly where the LA's assessment is thin. It should quantify need and recommend specific provision. The LA cannot simply ignore it; they must engage with all relevant evidence.

Around 96% of SEND Tribunal appeals are resolved in the family's favour (Ministry of Justice, sector-wide). Many families succeed without a solicitor, especially with well-organised evidence and clear grounds. The barrier is usually preparation, not cost: the registration fee is £0.

Outcomes depend on the strength of evidence and how clearly the grounds are argued, but sector-wide figures show the large majority of appeals succeed at or before hearing. Local authorities frequently concede once a properly prepared case is in front of them.

Paper hearings are quicker and less stressful but offer no chance to respond to questions; face-to-face (or video) hearings let you and your witnesses explain things and answer the panel. For contested cases involving placement or significant provision, an oral hearing is usually stronger.

A good parental statement is calm, specific and chronological. Describe your child's needs, what daily life actually costs them, what has and has not worked, and what you are asking the Tribunal to order. Anchor it to evidence and avoid emotive generalisations.

Include the EHCP and the decision being appealed, independent and LA professional reports, school records and reports, a chronology of events, attendance data, and your parental statement. Index it clearly so the panel can find what matters quickly.

Informal exclusions ("can you collect them early?") are unlawful when used routinely. Keep a written record of every occasion, request it in writing, and raise it formally. A pattern of sending a child home is itself strong evidence of unmet need that belongs in an EHCP or appeal.

Cost can be a factor, but it is not a trump card. The LA must compare genuinely suitable placements and cannot refuse a suitable school purely because a cheaper option exists if that cheaper option cannot meet need. The comparison has to be like-for-like.

If your child has an EHCP and meets eligibility (for example, distance, or being unable to walk to school safely because of SEND), the LA may have to arrange free transport, which can include a taxi and an escort. Transport arrangements can be challenged if they are unsuitable.

No. A diagnosis is not required. The legal test is whether your child has special educational needs that may require an EHCP. Unmet need matters, not a specific label.

Yes. School observations alone are not sufficient grounds for refusal. Parent evidence and home observations are relevant and carry legal weight. Many children mask their difficulties at school.

They cannot simply dismiss independent professional evidence. The SEND Code of Practice requires them to consider all relevant evidence. We help you ensure it is properly presented and formally engaged with.

We offer transparent pricing with fixed-fee packages for EHCP applications, amendments, and appeals. We also offer document review services starting from £195. Contact us for a quote tailored to your situation.