The SEND Reforms consultation closes on 18th May 2026. There are 39 questions in the consultation but there is no need to respond to all of them.
The National Education Union (NEU) welcomes the proposed long-term direction of travel – particularly the commitment to a 10-year transition, early investment in mainstream provision, and a national focus on belonging and collaboration. These themes cut across policy areas that the union has long advocated. However, core concerns remain around funding, workload, staffing and the risk of weakened entitlements.
We know that there are significant implications in these proposals for teachers, SENCO's, support staff and leaders and that they will be directly affected by
- a increased planning, assessment, and documentation duties
- more complex coordination with external specialists
- new expectations around early intervention
- closer collaboration with Family Hubs and health partners
- new inspection frameworks.
We also know that without investment, reforms may worsen:
- the duty to identify and meet need early
- staffing pressures
- recruitment and retention challenges
- SENCO workload
- mainstream placement stability
Make sure Government know how these proposals will impact on you.
It is important that the government and DfE receive responses from as many practitioners as possible hearing about your experiences alongside suggestions for what you know works or what would work better than the proposals in the consultation. You could also consider writing a response from your school group.
Your responses can be as concise as is necessary, or you may want to just select a couple of questions and provide greater detail.
Below are some suggestions of particular questions you may wish to focus on in your response.
SENCOs:
Q14. How should the Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO) role evolve to better meet the needs of children and young people with SEND?
Q17. How can we best support transition for young people with SEND, so that they are well supported into post‑16 provision and further education, training or employment?
Q18. How can we make sure that every area can meet the full range of the needs of children and young people through Inclusion Bases?
Q19. How can we make sure that Inclusion Bases help children and young people succeed in mainstream settings?
Q20. Through the Experts at Hand offer, we want to ensure that mainstream settings can get quick specialist support for children and young people. What arrangements are needed between local area partners (education, health, social care) to deliver this Experts at Hand offer effectively?
Q23. We propose that EHCPs will guarantee educational provision set out in a Specialist Provision Package, with day‑to‑day provision captured in Individual Support Plans.
What is needed to make these proposals work effectively?
Q28. What do you think is the right maximum length of time for a temporary placement in Alternative Provision (AP) schools? Please explain your rationale.
Q38. Do you agree that a SEND specialist (e.g. a SENCO) should sit on the school complaint panel, when the complaint relates to SEND support and provision? Please explain why.
Early Years:
Q9. What arrangements would best support effective joint working between early years providers, Best Start Family Hubs, health, local authorities, and parents for children with SEND in the early years?
Q10. How can the early years foundation stage (EYFS) two‑year old progress check and the Healthy Child Programme development review be improved so that children’s needs are identified and supported more quickly? Please share examples.
Q24. We propose creating a more direct route to Specialist Provision Packages and EHCP assessments for children under 5 with complex needs. How can we make sure this works in practice?
School Leaders /SLT:
Q13. What practical actions can help teachers, educators and leaders manage workload whilst implementing these changes?
Q27. What information and support do parents need to make a decision about which setting will be best for their child?
Q30. How should settings be held accountable for how they spend their Inclusive Mainstream funding? Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Reform – Government Consultation
Q31. Do you agree that more SEND funding should sit directly within mainstream budgets? Please explain why.
Q32: In relation to pooled funding, we propose that every school becomes part of a local SEND group. Do you agree that this proposal aligns with our aim for all schools to be part of high quality, community‑based trusts?
Q33: How should disagreements about membership, provision, or funding in groups of schools for SEND be resolved?
Q34: How can we ensure the most effective use of these local partnership groups?
Q35. Which stakeholders are important for the success of local partnership groups, and why?
Q36: How can we build stronger collaboration and a culture of improvement through local SEND strategic plans?
For everyone to consider:
Q2. How can we make sure that high‑quality evidence and best practice inform decisions about SEND? Please share examples.
Q3. How can we ensure that children are best supported by the Universal offer?
Q4. How can we ensure that children in the Targeted layer, are best supported?
Q5. How can we ensure that children in the Targeted Plus layer, are best supported?
Q6. How can we ensure that children in the Specialist layer are best supported?
Q7. How do you think early years settings, schools, and college can best support the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people?
Q8. Do you agree that the refreshed ‘areas of development’ will support educators to understand and address barriers to learning and participation? Please explain your answer.
Q12. What are the most important issues for national training to cover, to help support children and young people with SEND?
Q13. What practical actions can help teachers, educators and leaders manage workload whilst implementing these changes?
Q16: How can we ensure Individual Support Plans are clear, concise and practical for professionals to use?
Q22. How can Specialist Provision Packages be designed to effectively support the main types of need we currently recognise? Q23. We propose that EHCPs will guarantee educational provision set out in a Specialist Provision Package, with day‑to‑day provision captured in Individual Support Plans. What is needed to make these proposals work effectively?