A Head of SEND on the Schools White Paper: EHCPs, Inclusion and System Change

In this blog, you will learn:

• About the benefits of schools working within Multi-Academy Trusts, according to a Head of SEND.
• How early intervention and specialist expertise could reduce EHCP demand and strengthen inclusion, according to a Head of SEND.
• Why balancing trust-wide systems with local flexibility could be essential for effective SEND delivery.
• How to find and apply for the latest local authority SEND jobs.

The Schools White Paper marks a significant moment for the education sector. Titled Every Child Achieving and Thriving, the policy paper aims to drive reform across schools and SEND systems which have been under increasing pressure in recent years. However, opinion remains divided on whether the Schools White Paper will deliver meaningful change or repeat familiar challenges.

We spoke to Natalie, a Head of SEND with over 15 years’ experience across mainstream, independent and specialist settings. With a strong focus on how inclusion works in practice, Natalie is committed to turning policy into meaningful, real-world impact.

In this interview, Natalie shares her perspective on how the Schools White Paper could influence SEND provision, from reducing reliance on EHCPs to strengthening inclusion and improving consistency across the system.

What are your initial thoughts on the Schools White Paper and the direction it sets for the future of SEND provision?

I think the Schools White Paper re-emphasises the principles set out in the 2015 SEND Code of Practice, but reframes them for the current context. The principles haven’t changed; early identification, inclusive practice and joined-up working have always been at the heart of SEND provision.

What has changed is the level of demand and the pressure the system is now under. In my experience, schools work tirelessly to support students, but don’t have the resources or staffing to do it as well as they’d like. This is where the system becomes strained and EHCPs shift from being a tool for securing support to a form of legal protection within an uncertain system.

EHCPs are essential for many children, but I think the current reliance on them reflects a lack of confidence in the wider system. If mainstream provision felt more consistent, better resourced and more reliable, we could see a more balanced use of statutory plans.

I don’t believe the Schools White Paper is introducing anything new. It’s bringing the system back in line with its original purpose while addressing today’s more complex, high-pressure environment.

The government proposes digitising EHCP processes and creating a more streamlined system. How realistic do you think this is in practice?

I’ve seen some local authorities digitise EHCP processes really effectively. When done well, it helps families feel involved rather than left out. It also improves transparency by showing what evidence has been submitted, what is still needed and who is responsible for each step.

In my experience, being transparent helps avoid situations where information is lost or where accountability becomes unclear. It makes the process more collaborative; however, it is only as strong as the people using it. There needs to be clear training for all stakeholders so that the system is used consistently and purposefully.

Digitisation also needs to come with strong safeguards around professionalism and language. EHCPs are legal documents and the way we describe a child or young person matters.

In a fast-paced digital system, language can become too informal or be written in moments of frustration. This can have a lasting impact, particularly when information is shared widely across services.

There needs to be clear guidance, quality assurance and accountability around how information is recorded to ensure it remains respectful and accurate.

I also have concerns around accessibility. Not every family has strong IT skills or reliable access to technology. We need to make sure digitisation doesn’t exclude those who already struggle to navigate the system. There has to be flexibility for the process to remain inclusive and efficient.

Do you think mainstream settings are currently equipped to meet the government's plans to improve inclusion and accessibility? What do you think needs to change?

Some mainstream schools do inclusion and SEND well, but this isn’t consistent across all systems. Too often, the quality of provision depends on individual schools or even individual Teachers, rather than a shared expectation.

If mainstream education is expected to encompass more complexity, we need greater clarity around what inclusive practice really looks like. There should be a clear set of expectations that schools can adapt and interpret in a way that reflects their own values. It also needs to ensure consistency in pupils’ experiences.

Inclusion shouldn’t sit in policy documents alone; it should be reflected in the environment and how teaching is delivered day to day.

SEND needs to sit within school development plans, not alongside them. When SEND is a priority, it drives training, shapes teaching and ensures accountability. It’s not just about skill; it’s about culture. Inclusion needs to shape how we teach all pupils, not just how we support some.

The government wants all schools to join or form Multi-Academy Trusts. How might this structural change impact SEND delivery at a local level?

I think schools are stronger when they work within trusts because they can share expertise, build better systems and develop capacity in ways individual schools often can’t. However, this only works when everyone is aligned. 

Schools should be able to join trusts that reflect their values and approach to inclusion. When that alignment is right, trusts can create consistency, offer meaningful support and strengthen SEND provision across multiple settings.

There’s also an opportunity to use that strength to develop specialist knowledge, improve training and respond more effectively to increasing levels of need. It’s also important that the local context isn’t lost. SEND provision needs to remain responsive to individual communities and families. There has to be a balance between trust-wide systems and local flexibility. The real impact will depend on how thoughtfully those structures are built and led.

Do you feel the Schools White Paper adequately addresses current workforce pressures within schools and local authorities?

Workforce pressures sit at the heart of many of the challenges within SEND and a key issue is inconsistency. For example, pay, role expectations and job descriptions vary widely in SENCO forums, which creates confusion and makes the role harder to sustain.

The same is true within local authorities, where there is often a high turnover of SEND Case Officers. That lack of continuity has a direct impact on families. Relationships are disrupted, information is repeated and confidence in the system is weakened.

When families face instability, schools often become their most reliable source of contact and support. As a result, schools take on added pressure, placing extra strain on staff who are already stretched thin. 

Alongside this, Teachers often feel criticised when it comes to SEND. It’s an emotional area and it’s easy to feel like you’ve got it wrong. That fear can lead to hesitation rather than confidence in adapting practice.

I would like to see a stronger focus on empowering Teachers to take ownership of strategies within their classrooms, rather than feeling that SEND sits outside of their role.

Until there is greater consistency, clearer role definition and stronger retention across schools and local authorities, wider reforms will struggle to embed.

How will early intervention plans and Alternative Provision reforms reduce demand for EHCPs and tribunal appeals over the long term?

In theory, meeting needs earlier and more effectively could reduce the demand for EHCPs and tribunal appeals over the long term. It all depends on whether early intervention is genuinely available and trusted.

At the moment, many families pursue EHCPs because it is the only reliable way to secure support. Until mainstream provision feels consistent and robust, that demand is unlikely to reduce.

A key part of strengthening early intervention is making better use of specialist expertise. Professionals such as Speech and Language Therapists and Educational Psychologists are highly skilled, but too often their time is focused on assessing the most complex cases.

There is potential to use that expertise more strategically to support adaptive teaching, upskill staff and build confidence within classrooms. If that knowledge is shared more widely, it creates a domino effect: improving classroom practice, strengthening early identification and ultimately reducing the need for escalation.

For Alternative Provision to be effective, people must view it as a meaningful, appropriate choice, not a last resort. It has to be high quality, attractive to families and led by skilled and highly trained staff who understand the needs of the pupils they are working with.

It’s also important that Alternative Provision doesn’t become a form of long-term separation. There needs to be a clear focus on reintegration so that pupils remain connected to mainstream education.

Ultimately, reducing demand relies on building confidence in the system. Families need to trust that support will be in place without needing to escalate to statutory processes.

How do you think the Schools White Papers ambition for every child to ‘achieve and thrive’ could be realistically achieved in practice?

By being clear about what that means. Achievement can’t be limited to exam outcomes and thriving can’t sit outside of learning. For pupils with SEND, this includes social, emotional and communication development alongside academic progress. The groundwork is already in place in many schools, but it must be used consistently and with clear purpose. 

The introduction of individual SEND profiles for all pupils with SEND could be a really useful step. They have the potential to bring together key information, support consistency across staff and keep the focus on the individual child.

Their impact depends on effective use, with clearly measurable outcomes that are properly recognised and celebrated. Otherwise, there is a risk they become another document rather than a meaningful tool for supporting progress.

Ultimately, it comes back to quality-first teaching and culture. Pupils are more likely to achieve and thrive when they feel understood, supported and that their progress is valued.

The Schools White Paper highlights improving attendance and reducing persistent absence for children with SEND. How realistic do you think these proposals are and what challenges might schools and local authorities face in achieving them?

It’s an important focus, but attendance is often a symptom rather than the root issue. For many pupils with SEND, absence is linked to unmet needs such as sensory overload, anxiety, or difficulty accessing the curriculum. If those factors aren’t addressed, attendance strategies risk feeling punitive rather than supportive.

In my experience, attendance comes down to a few key factors. It is about the child’s trust in the school and their sense of belonging. It is also about the family’s trust in the school system and the value it gives their child. 

Attendance can also depend on behaviour and recognition systems that motivate and reward young people. Most importantly, it is about whether school feels like a community.

When schools focus on more than just results and create spaces where pupils feel seen, supported and happy, attendance can improve. That means offering a curriculum and experience that engages pupils not just academically, but also socially and emotionally.

Improving attendance isn’t just about monitoring and stepping in when needed. It is also about building trust, strengthening relationships and creating a school experience students and families believe in.

What elements of the Schools White Paper surprised you the most?

Several elements stood out to me and signalled an encouraging shift toward a more structured and consistent approach, especially the idea of schools having inclusion bases. I was also surprised by the proposals around EHCP reform and an increased focus on Teacher training and the introduction of pupil profiles for all pupils with SEND.

What surprised me most was the budget being allocated to support these changes. Investment is key and gives the proposals a sense of credibility. It moves them beyond aspiration and makes them feel more robust and valued within the system.

Without it, many of these ideas would struggle to translate into practice. With it, there is a real opportunity to build something more sustainable and effective.

What elements of the Schools White Paper do you think are most at risk of failing?

The biggest risk is the assumption that mainstream schools can absorb increased complexity without a significant increase in capacity. There is a real risk that expectations shift more quickly than the system can realistically respond.

If schools must meet greater needs without enough time, training, or staff, pressure on educators will rise and the quality of support will vary more widely.

I also think there is a risk around reducing reliance on EHCPs too quickly. For many families, EHCPs represent security and clarity in a system that can otherwise feel inconsistent. If that trust isn’t rebuilt first through strong, reliable universal provision, demand could increase.

Ultimately, the risk isn’t in the ambition itself, but in the pace and sequencing of implementation.

Looking ahead, what do you think will be the most successful element of the Schools White Paper?

The most successful element is likely to be the focus on strengthening early identification and intervention, particularly if it is supported by better use of specialist expertise.

There is potential in using specialists more strategically, not just for assessment, but to upskill staff and strengthen adaptive teaching across classrooms.

If that expertise is used to build confidence and capability within schools, it creates a domino effect: improving classroom practice, supporting earlier identification and reducing the need for more intense interventions later.

Alongside this, the emphasis on SEND profiles and a shared understanding of pupils’ needs has the potential to improve consistency across staff and settings. These are the kinds of changes that are less visible in the short term, but have the greatest impact over time.

Anything you would like to add?

It’s genuinely encouraging to see such a strong and explicit focus on SEND. In practice, it can so easily get lost amid wider system pressures, so having it brought back to the forefront feels important. Children and young people with SEND deserve that level of attention and intention.

I also really value that the Schools White Paper has started a wider conversation. It’s prompting schools, trusts and local authorities to reflect on what inclusion looks like in practice, rather than just in principle.

What’s particularly positive is seeing trusts respond by creating roles and structures that strengthen SEND leadership. It feels like SEND is shifting from something that sits on the margins to something that is strategically led and prioritised.

For me, it feels like a reset. There’s a real opportunity here to refocus, build capacity and get closer to a system that works more effectively for both families and schools.

Local authority SEND recruitment specialists

As award-winning SEND recruiters, we support local authority SEND services and private sector providers nationwide with their temporary, interim and permanent staffing needs. Whether you require a single hire, multiple placements or an entire project team, simply request a call back and one of our experienced recruiters will contact you to discuss how we can help. 

Looking for your next local authority SEND job? Either search the latest jobs or upload your CV and one of our consultants will be in touch when a suitable opportunity arises.