The findings of the National Audit Office report about special educational needs (SEN) system will come as absolutely no surprise to anyone with experience of the system. 

A system that “often falls short” is one of the key takeaways from the report – a comment we could not agree more with. The report states very firmly that any reform to the system should focus on mainstream schools being more inclusive. This is a complex point and one which is certainly the case for many, but there will always be a need for highly-specialised provision with highly-trained staff. 

As a NAO report, this is about finances primarily. If that is the lens through which meaningful and impactful change happens, so be it. But what should never be forgotten is in amongst all the numbers are children and their families who shoulder the burden of this system. The narrowed horizons, the years of lost education, the stresses and strains of battling for diagnosis, EHC Plans, suitable provisions and so much more impact human beings and families for the whole of their lives.  Cuts that are made now are felt even more so in decades to come.

The report talks about 'demand' for special needs education. It is not demand, as that is a commercial business term about what consumers would like to buy. What we are talking about is 'need': we can choose to meet it, or not meet it, but the children, if they are the 'consumers', have precious few choices. The report also talks about the increased costs of providing SEND education. What is not mentioned is the real-terms decrease in per pupil spending across all primary and secondary education since 2009. Children have been driven out of mainstream provision, and now special needs funding is being accused of being a problem which must be dealt with. Once again, disabled people and the most vulnerable seem to be valued less.

There have been countless reports in recent months - all of which come to similar conclusions around the SEN system. The attention on this is good. The solutions suggested are much less so. 

Where we do agree with the NAO is that this requires a LONG-TERM plan.  Any major system reform quickly introduced into such a fragile system, particularly with the aim of instantly saving money, will be catastrophic.

There are some actions which can be immediate however: 

• Stopping the shaming and blaming of parents who fight for their children’s rights. These children’s rights are not unreasonable – they are legally enshrined rights.
• Local authorities playing their part in fighting for greater funding from central government for the people they serve in their LA areas – not meekly accepting their funding “is what it is”.
• Political leaders not igniting culture wars around autism and neurodiversity – casting them and their allies as others - for their own gain. 

Central government must make SEN system reform a priority. The government has responded to the report with comments around “a greater focus on mainstream provision and more early intervention”. They are not talking about the whole system unless they are also recognising the needs of those that require specialist provision.

Unfortunately, a solution probably starts with finding a way to maintain medium-term deficits whilst the long-term infrastructure problems are addressed. 

But that solution must start somewhere and it must start soon. 

Ryan Campbell,

Chief Executive Officer,

Prior's Court Foundation