SEND White Paper Impact & Moving Forward

In February 2026, the UK government, under Prime Minister Keir Starmer, issued a white paper outlining recommendations and reforms to the schools and SEND system in England.

In this live masterclass, Olivia discusses the good, the bad, and the key points from this paper that impact you, and to do that she is joined by Kelly Jarvis, Head of Advocacy and Consultancy at Sunshine Support and Education Consultant Sara Donnelly.

Read the white paper and full report here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/every-child-achieving-and-thriving 

Together, Dr. Olivia, Kelly and Sara discuss:
 ✨ the SEN legislation gaps

 ✨ problems in the tribunal process

 ✨ the problem with inclusion hubs

 ✨ the new OFSTED framework

 ✨ is the White Paper really delivering anything?

🤝Contact Kelly and find out more about Sunshine Support: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kelly-j-100095225/ 

🤝Find out more about Sara’s work at https://www.linkedin.com/in/sara-donnelly-177300217/ 

💛 If this episode resonated with you, please share it with someone who needs to hear it.

📚 New Book — Out Now  👉 Order your copy
Beyond the Label: Empowering Parents of ADHD Girls
A powerful blend of science and lived experience to help you truly understand and support your daughter.

💬 Connect with Us

🌱 Join our SEND Parenting Private WhatsApp Community — a free, safe, welcoming space to share, learn, and feel supported by parents who truly understand the realities of neurodiverse family life.

⚡ Ready to go deeper?
Become part of the ADHD Warrior Mum’s Membership — a paid membership space with group coaching with Dr Olivia, access to masterclasses with neurodiverse experts, monthly self-care and real connection. You don't have to navigate this journey alone.

📩 Contact Me
If you wou...

Transcript

Welcome And What Changes Matter

Dr Olivia 0:04

Welcome to the Send Parenting Podcast, focused on supporting, inspiring, and empowering parents and their neurodiverse children. I'm your neurodiverse host, Dr. Olivia Kessel. We'll be speaking weekly with experts in the world of neurodiversity. And most importantly, hearing the voices of other parents just like you. Looking forward to having you join us weekly as part of the SEN Parenting Tribe. Welcome everyone to today's masterclass. We are going to be unpacking the Send White Paper reforms that were released in February, what it actually says, what it means for your family right now, and what you need to know for the future. Okay. And it's, you know, it is a major reform, and the language can feel quite technical and distant from the reality of actually parenting your child in school. So today we're going to cut through that together and we're going to understand it better. And that's really the purpose of this. But a little bit of housekeeping before we get started. I am going to ask everyone to please keep themselves on mute while they're not speaking. I want it to be interactive, but I also want to get through a lot of information. So if you could hold your questions until the end, that would be super. And then raise your hand and then we'll have an opportunity to ask questions so that we can get through everything. I'm joined by these two wonderful guests today, Kelly and Sarah. And I am so we're privileged actually to have them on this masterclass because they bring a combination of insights that is really going to help us unpick and understand the Send White Paper. So first I'd like to introduce Kelly Jarvis. She is with Sunshine Support. Many of the people on this call today will know Sunshine Support and all the wonderful work you do. But you're going to bring your legal mind and your educational rights lens to the conversation, which is fantastic. Can you start by just telling us a little bit about your background, Kelly?

SPEAKER_03 2:07

Yeah, sure.

SPEAKER_04 2:08

So I am from Sunshine Support, which is an independent consultancy and advocacy and training service all about Send. So primarily we work with parents, but we go into schools and we do training. We've just recently done some really great training with the House of Commons and members of Parliament, which is super just where we want to be right now with all of this going on. Prior to this role, I was an educationalist. So I trained to be a teacher in 2005. By 2011, I'd sort of realised that special education was where my heart was. So I moved from secondary mainstream across to special education and became head of a residential and day independent provision in 2015, which I loved very much because we worked with super complex young people and their families and made a really, real big difference to them. And then had some babies in the middle of COVID and realized I couldn't do that job successfully. So joined forces with our founder at Sunshine Support, and here we are now, having grown substantially since then.

SPEAKER_03 3:15

So got a bit of an educational mind, do a lot of legal work with Tribunal, that kind of thing. Excellent. Well, welcome, Kelly.

Dr Olivia 3:21

Thank you for taking your time today to be with us. And Sarah, another fantastic mind with Sarah Donnelly Consulting. Sarah has a really unique history in that you're not only you've worked in the system of education, you've been a head teacher, but you also have a neurospicy child. So you understand it from both perspectives. So can you introduce yourself, Sarah?

SPEAKER_05 3:42

Yeah, that's a really good description. I would say neurospicy household in general, actually. So yeah, hi, I'm Sarah Donnelly and I run Sarah

Meet Kelly And Sarah

SPEAKER_05 3:50

Donnelly Consultancy. I'm a former headteacher. I was a headteacher up until the end of August. I have been in education for 14, going on 15 years. I've done various leadership roles. I'm now a national trainer. I train on autism, ADHD, and all things S E N for the NHS and also in schools across the country. I am neurodivergent myself. I'm ADHD and I'm on a pathway for my autism diagnoses. I just need my final piece of paper. I don't think that will come as a huge surprise when it lands. My children are also neurodivergent, and you're right, because my feet are on both sides of the fence. I specialise in SEN professionally. Was always really fascinated about SEND, probably when my son showed signs of dyslexia when he was seven, but nobody had the answers. Nobody knew how to help. And I felt like I was being dismissed and not validated. And my daughter is autistic and ADHD, and actually, she has experienced significant EBSA and has been out of school for a year. In fact, she only returned to school yesterday and has an incredible specialist placement now. But it took a year of tears and sweat and blood. And even knowing the system and being inside it, it was really hard to navigate. Which is why I now run Sarah Dominale Consultancy. So I deliver training, like I said, and I also advocate widely for better send provision and I support parents as well. That's me in a nutshell.

Good News Or Bad News

Dr Olivia 5:22

Excellent. So now let's get into the nitty-gritty of the masterclass. We've got four themes to kind of work through today, but I wanted to start out with like a helicopter view of kind of the open, big kind of picture. Is this reform good news, bad news, or does it depend? And I'm gonna start with you, Sarah, in terms of answering this question, because this has been really a hot topic, actually, on our WhatsApp group as well. Um, so how families are feeling right now, their hopes, their fears, their confusion over this, there's a lot of misinformation, I think, even from schools currently that is being fed back to people. So um I'll I'll leave you with that.

SPEAKER_05 6:02

So it's a good question. Is it good, bad, or indifferent? Well, I think it's a combination. Um, parents are quite rightly, from what I'm hearing, I'm sure Kelly will agree, are quite worried and really quite cautious about what they're seeing. And actually, when I train in schools, educators are very much feeling the same way. There's a real feeling of could this just be a sheep in a wolf in sheep's clothing, is the way I would put it. I think there are some positive aspects. There's a couple of them scattered throughout here and there. You know, I like the focus on enrichment, for example, and they talk about monitoring belonging, and I think it's fantastic that schools will be given guides on reasonable adjustments, which has always been a grey area as to what parents feel they can ask for and what's acceptable. However, if I'm honest, I think the good may not outweigh the bad, and I think there are some points in there that need a lot more conversation, has actually been said. And I know Kelly's going to talk about the tribunal service, but for example, even the recategorisation of the four areas of need in the SEND code of practice. So I think I'm leaning towards not so good at the moment.

Dr Olivia 7:18

And I think that's the general consensus, too. And so today what we're going to do is we're going to kind of look at what that means and what that means for us as parents and

ISPs Versus EHCPs Right Now

Dr Olivia 7:27

for our children. So, Kelly, this is a real super interesting from your kind of like legal kind of mind, you know, the architecture of this new tiered system and what duties each tier kind of carries. And could you unpick that for us a bit?

SPEAKER_04 7:41

Yes, absolutely. So it's been one of the most frequent questions I've seen on the Department for Education social media, actually, which they're utilising greatly at the moment. And it's it pops up a lot. It's um, will the new ISP, so the the individual support plans, have the same legal weight as an EHCP? Because essentially what the government are proposing is that before you get to an EHCP, there has to be a lot more structure and accountability on the support you were given before that. Now, in theory, that's actually a good thing. If you just look at it from a black and white perspective of that, it's actually quite good because at the moment it's a complete lottery as to what you get before you get an EHCP. And this is partly what has led so many families to seek the legal pathway of an EHCP because of incredibly varied experiences throughout uh their whole educational journey, um, which have been dependent on whether the school that they're in is particularly Send focused or not, whether the school believes the parent or not. So they seek that legal pathway. Now, what the government are proposing in ISPs is a lot more of a structured, digitalised and homogenised system, whereby more pupils need to have their needs met essentially. The downside is that there's still no legal jurisdiction over that type of provision, and that it appears that the government envisage far fewer children having EHCPs than currently. So, what that means in practice is that if we take, for example, all the children in the country who have send right now and the proportion of those who have EHCPs, this model moves towards a much greater proportion of those children with send not having legal backing of the delivery of their provision. That is what's causing the worry.

Dr Olivia 9:39

It's trying to be more inclusive, but it's taking away the rights that of parents that have EHCPs right now.

SPEAKER_04 9:47

And potentially making it considerably harder to obtain them. So there's no actual change to EHCPs and the processes until at least 2030. So essentially, if you are now a parent who has a child of year three age or older, um, you are likely to keep your EHCP up until secondary school. And, you know, this is something that at the moment parents are really worried about. Will they take away my EHCPs? Um, year three or older, likely to go all the way up to the end of secondary school, year 11. Year two or below, um, you'll be reassessed for an EHCP at the end of year six, so at the transition point between primary school and secondary school. So uh that's a worry because I guess parents are now in this limbo as to whether they should apply or not. You know, what should they do? Um, my advice is definitely to apply, because nothing's changed about the law, nothing has has changed about the legal process right now, and you know, the future aspirations of what an ISP might look like versus what an EHCP might look like andor unlock in terms of specialist provision packages. None of that is clear yet. And so if you're looking to secure the right kind of provision for your child right now, the answer is apply for an EHCP.

Dr Olivia 11:05

And that's super interesting. Sarah, I'd love you to come in on this as well because I've heard, you know, from some of the people in my community where schools have actually been saying to them, don't apply for an EHCP. They're actually getting that advice from Senko's. So have you experienced that in kind of some of the trainings and the experience you've had in schools?

SPEAKER_05 11:21

I have experienced that with local authorities more than schools. And I think the message is coming top down rather than directly from schools. Schools, the schools that I'm working with feel very much in limbo, and until told otherwise, are generally carrying on as is. But the local authorities absolutely appear to feel that this means, well, we don't apply for them. I recently worked with a parent, the EHCP was turned down, and the response was very much along those lines that you know it's all under review, and when the child abundantly very clearly needs her EHCP. So I think exactly what Kelly said, and what I would be saying to everyone is the law hasn't changed. It does say in the consultation paper very clearly, and in fairness, they have well, it's in bold that the law has not yet changed, this is a consultation, and that at the moment EHCPs and the process is the same as it always was. So exactly what Kelly said, if you feel your child needs support, continue advocating, continue pushing for those EHCPs because we don't really know where this is going just yet. The devil will be in the detail, and that's that detail's not been laid out yet.

Dr Olivia 12:26

Exactly. And in terms of timelines for this, when when would we see change?

SPEAKER_04 12:32

Well, it it's sort of staggered, really. Um, and I've I've been very fortunate to spend some time with MPs and their caseworkers who've been sort of at the forefront of it all, really, in Parliament, which has been very useful to get their insights. So there's no changes to the existing EHCPs before September 2030. The new system assessments will begin the year before that, 2029. Um, so it's still quite some way off yet. And I suspect there will be some change to the proposals as a result of the consultation. I think the government would be missing a trick if they changed nothing, because um I think there's this bubbling narrative at the moment that is there any point in a consultation? Well, yes, there is. Um and we've all got to remember that there is, and we can't sit back and go, well, my voice won't be heard. We've got to all contribute because I do think the government will make changes because it needs to be seen, to be listening. Um, there's no about us without us, after all, you know, and we we have to have our voices heard. So I think there will be some change. There was an interesting legal sort of bit of news that came out quite recently where there was a leak, um, and there's been many of those. Um, there was a leak that basically uh alluded to the government having pre-decided the change to the tribunal process, and that that would not change as a result of the consultation. And that caused quite a for-ore. The government have since come out and said that's not accurate, that all elements of the consultation will be um, you know, up for review as a result of people's voice. So, yeah, underline, fill out the consultation, get your voice heard.

Dr Olivia 14:21

And there's a deadline on that, isn't there, Kelly?

SPEAKER_04 14:24

Uh yeah, there is, but I need to double check that as to when um when when there is that's that's I was thinking.

SPEAKER_05 14:35

I was just gonna say exactly what Kelly was saying. One of the key issues here is is that you know, as many parents as possible need to respond to the consultation. And I think that's one thing I would urge everybody to do. It can feel quite overwhelming. I think it's 39 questions, and some of them won't be relevant to you and your situation, but you don't have to respond to every single question on there. So do take the time to have a look and respond, because if we don't, then they will be able to say that, well, everyone seemed quite happy with it, which is clearly not the case.

Dr Olivia 15:05

Yeah, and we can send out a link to that consultation afterwards so that people have access to it.

Tribunal Changes And School Naming

Dr Olivia 15:09

Now you brought up an interesting point there too, Kelly, tribunals. Now, what was it exactly that they were trying to do with tribunals that is different? Because this is this is something that you've highlighted to me that I missed, and I'm sure a lot of the listeners today will have missed regarding the changes to tribunal.

SPEAKER_04 15:24

Okay, so it seems to be quite a sort of small change, but it's not in terms of domino effect. So the tribunal will not be changing their powers in terms of quashing decisions. So there will still be the right of reply into the tribunal if the local authority refuse to assess for an EHCP, refuse to issue for an EHCP, that kind of thing. The big change, however, and this is is quite it's quite hidden in the white paper, I think. It's not something that leaps out, like you know, the ISP versus EHCP issue. It's it's not leaping out at all people. But the the issue is that the proposal um seeks to remove the tribunal's power to name a specific school. So the tribunal will be able to quash a decision of naming a school if they believe that school is not the correct one. But what it won't be able to do is name the correct one. So at present, when parents go to a Section I tribunal hearing, um they go in with their choice of school, the local authority has theirs, the tribunal evidence-led process looks at the evidence on each account, decides where the appropriate setting is and names it. Um, it won't be that way if these proposals come through in their fullness. Um, it will be that only the tribunal will say the local authority school is not suitable, it's back to the drawing board for you. Um this is really worrying because the delays this could create are significant, because all that will mean is that the local authority go back and name somewhere else that probably is not appropriate. And that has caused a huge worry amongst people and their families, because at the moment, you know, the only the only route into like high quality specialist provision for many families, due to how overstretched individual local authorities are and how placements are often very, very full, is that independent sector and that right of tribunal. And I know several colleagues in the independent sector, um, not just special needs actually, but also um main mainstream independent schools, who are genuinely worried about the future of their settings. Um, because who's going to name them now? It's it's a worry.

Dr Olivia 17:42

It's giving, in my opinion, too much power to the local authority, which a lot of us have been burned and have, you know, wounds and PTSD from that. So it it it it skews that kind of unbiased body reviewing and having oversight over actually where is the right place for your child. It puts it back in the local authorities kind of pocket.

SPEAKER_04 18:02

Absolutely. And and what if there is no right place for your child? I mean, EOTIS, education other than at school, is not particularly mentioned at all in the white paper. Personally, I think that this is because it's conflated somewhat with elective home education in the minds of people who don't know the difference, and it's not, it's very distinctly different from elective home education. And there's nothing really about EOTIS in in the white paper, certainly not whether the tribunal would be able to keep section I blank, for example, um, which is the way that EOTIS is agreed and awarded. And it it seems to me, most likely, that it will be where the government is saying, oh, the most complex young young people will have an EHCP, which unlocks specialist provision. I suspect EOTIS will be in with that sort of tier. But we know that those children who have EOTIS are complex in perhaps a different way than what the government thinking of as complex, you know. Um, we're thinking of learners who perhaps are exceptionally bright, significantly struggle with anxiety and perhaps have a more demand-avoidant profile, and who are exceptionally gifted minds. They just need to learn in a less conventional way. And we would be doing them such a massive disservice not to have a clear pathway for that type of learner. You know, those those learners who need 80% of their timetable as ICT or outdoors or learning how to use their hands doing something. That at the moment, it's not clear from the white paper at all how those children will be catered for.

SPEAKER_05 19:37

I was going to say, Kelly, I do wonder if that is to do with the drive to just move away from elective home education and EOS in general. Because there are local authorities, they're being asked to put together packages on how they're going to increase inclusion in the era, but they're being rewarded if they are not creating putting children in specialist placements, not creating specialist provisions, and also if they're reducing the numbers of children that are home educated or under-elective. And many children under elective aren't really under-elective. They just simply haven't got the EOTIS package yet. And actually, they have no other option. So they have to go elective or face their child and not having their meet to need, and perhaps mental health going further and further downhill. So I I'm concerned that that's why EOTIS is not acknowledged in these reforms.

SPEAKER_04 20:28

I think you're completely right, completely right. And um, yeah, that there's so much scrutiny now in the home learning community who have stepped away from scrutiny for a massive reason, and there is significant unrest in that community about there being too much control over the choices that they are by law allowed to make for their child. And again, we have to underscore the law hasn't changed. You know, it's very clear in law that you, as a parent, have the ultimate decisions really over how you educate your child, and it does not have to be in a school. Sorry, Dr.

Inclusion Hubs And Specialist Places

Dr Olivia 21:05

That brings us on to our next topic, which is inclusion bases. Because I have a lot to say about this one. Yeah, I'm gonna have you start, Sarah, because you told a story with your daughter that was really powerful of wanting to visit one of these.

SPEAKER_05 21:18

So look, I think it's really important just to acknowledge that on the surface, inclusion bases and SCN hubs are a really positive thing. And in the schools I've worked with, the schools that have a sensory room and that have a space for SEN children to go and to reset and re-regulate, they are supporting their learners really well. However, inclusion hubs, in my opinion, cannot be a replacement for specialist provision. And there's a number of reasons around this. So, my first issue is around specialist provision, is what it says on the tin. Your child goes to a school where they have specialists in the area. That your child most needs to meet. So my daughter has just gone to a specialist provision, and they're for children with EBSA specifically, quite unique, incredible school. Now, that's great. Another child might go to a school which is SEMH primary need, another one might go to an autism school primary need. Now, if we have these inclusion hubs, what is going to happen is that these children will all be lumped in together. And therefore, there is nothing specialist about it. My second, well, many of concerns. The second concern is who is going to staff these inclusion hubs? Because at the moment, I would say 90% of the time they are staffed by TAs and not teachers. I have a dear colleague that I've worked with, she currently runs an inclusion hub, essentially one of the earlier ones. She is a TA, a senior TA, but she has nine children with very, very varied needs. And you know, she has said herself that on a day-to-day basis, she really is just struggling to get them all through the day. So they're my two main concerns. I think my other concern is around how inclusion hubs make children feel. So my daughter has been out of school for a year, like I said, up until yesterday. About four months into this process, we had found this incredible school, and we wanted to name the school. The local authority denied, and they chose to name a mainstream with an inclusion base. And I believe this was one of the early pilots of these inclusion hubs. We went to view it. My daughter is in year six. Uh, this was before the summer, so she would have no, no, it was this year, so year six, it was September. And she was mortified actually at the idea that she would have to go into a special room when she didn't feel great, that everybody would see her leave, get up and go. Um, she did actually, and hats off to her, she said to the head teacher of this school, but would I be in a main school, main class? And she said, You'd be in with all the other year six children. She said, But I don't like a class that's busy like that. Well, then you can go into the inclusion hub. And she said, But why would I put my hand up in front of all those children or tell anyone that I would need to go into a room? Because it would just make me look different, and everyone will think I'm weird. And this is the problem. When we do this, we're not including, we're segregating. You need to go in there, you need to be separate, you can't cope. The other issue is that it was mixed year groups. So one of the other things that she was she felt quite humiliated by is that there were no other year sixes accessing, and she would have been sitting with children who are year three, four, five, which to her, she said, so they think I'm stupid because I need to be with younger children. So my concern around it is the way these are presented to children. Are they going to be something which is offered as a supportive package, useful in very many ways, or are they just a replacement of a specialist provision? Because it can't be that.

SPEAKER_04 25:05

Yeah, I think we're in a bit of a crisis when it comes to building resources in schools, because the majority of schools have been around for, you know, donkeys years, haven't they? And they're not suited for the purpose of the modern learner, particularly post-COVID, where many businesses have shifted to a model that is much more flexible. And if we look at, say, things like Facebook and Google and the learner, your working space in those places, they are more flexible. You see breakout spaces, you see ping pong tables, you see desks of different heights. And these aren't things for neurodivergent people, they're not there as labels for this is for the people who have some sort of sensory processing need. They're there for all the employees to use because that's what makes them happier employees. And everyone has access to those things. And then we compare that to what most schools look like, and indeed what some inclusion bases look like, they don't look like that. They look like identicate classrooms with places that everyone is meant to sit in a row in the same way doing the same thing. And then we wonder why our quirkiest of learners, who have the potential perhaps to go on and be something amazing, they can't fit into that environment. Yet we do expect them to go out into the world and work it somewhere as flexible as, say, Facebook or Google. It's bonkers to me. So I think that for me, I hear inclusion hub and I just think it just can't be a porter cabin somewhere that's plonked outside with a few beanbags in it and a sensory lamp because that's just not inclusion. Um, when I worked in a mainstream school, this is how I knew my calling was towards special needs. I taught in a mainstream English classroom, so I was an English teacher, and two classes of 30 plus. And I did random stuff with my seating. I did, I had yoga balls. Um I had about four yoga balls in the classroom that would just float around the classroom. They didn't even live anywhere because I had no space. But they went around and every single lesson, four children sat on yoga balls. Were they the same children all the time? No, they weren't. Um, and it meant that those who really benefited from bouncing or moving as they were sitting, they didn't feel different because on other occasions, other people just sat on the yoga balls. It's little things like that that really do make people who need those extra accommodations feel much more included. And going to a bolt-on place with a few cursory items in it, because I'm worried, by the way, about funding and resourcing these inclusion bases, because it's it's it's not it's it's about the fabric of the building, it's about the training. Yes, the government have pledged sums of money in these areas, but you actually do the maths and it doesn't go very far, that money. So I'm just worried about what those spaces will sort of look like and be like in practice.

SPEAKER_05 27:51

Yeah, because I think they're missing a trick. If we're going to have true inclusion, what you said hit the nail on the head, Cully, because it's about normalizing practices. It's normalizing having varied seating, normalizing having flexi uniform rather than the rigid policies that we have in place across the schools now. And I think the reforms have really missed the trick there because some of those things don't necessarily cost money, they just require a bit more creative thinking and considering the approach to the whole school environment. But funding, I mean, like you say, funding isn't going to go very far. And I question throughout all of this who is going to staff half of the things they are talking about? Because they don't have to be funding.

Funding Gaps And Experts At Hand

Dr Olivia 28:39

Because it sounds like a huge amount of money, right? It's 1.6 billion, right?

SPEAKER_05 28:43

The inclusive mainstream fund, when you break it down, it works out £47 per pupil. Um, and I I saw someone else's calculations and they'd worked out that oh, ultimately it looks at essentially it'll be a new TA per school. But when you go, when you read through the consultation, they talk a lot about early intervention. For example, programs like Nelly, which can be they can be fantastic. I've seen them work really fantastic, early intervention packages in EUIFS, but they all rely on bodies and people to carry them out. And nowhere does it talk about the fact that actually the environment, the education system is understaffed. I know they're recruiting TA uh teachers, that's fantastic, but it takes a lot more than that to make a school run. You know, uh I was talking to a teacher just this morning, she was saying that she is a year one teacher, it is a four-form entry, they have one TA only in the mornings across all four classes. Now you tell me how on earth are they meant to carry out any type of early intervention, nelly pastoral support. It can't be done without bodies on the ground, and the funding doesn't cover that.

SPEAKER_04 29:58

And I have a similar concern about the experts at hand funding. So that's 1.8 billion. And on again, on the face of it, you think, yes, this is what we've been crying out for. So the experts at hand basically is this is this initiative whereby schools will have direct access to educational psychologists, speech and language therapists, OTs, which at the moment is significantly overstretched, and you essentially have a waiting list of however long the longest piece of string in the world is your waiting list for that. And it's very hard to get those professionals into school. So the government have pledged money to essentially increase this workforce and make that access uh from schools to those experts a lot, lot easier. Again, to justify, I think, or to rationalise why EHCPs will be less prevalent in mainstream schools, because at the moment, our route into those professionals generally is through an EHC needs assessment. Can't get that, can't get anything on a CAMS waiting list for 9,000 years, so we're going to get an EHC plan instead. So it's meant to say, right, this is a step that we're putting in place that will give you access to experts. Now, the problem is if you are training, well, first of all, is that money going to encourage more people to train in these areas? Because at the moment there just aren't enough graduates coming through in those areas. Similarly, if you train to be a psychologist, you may not go into educational psychology. There are many, many other areas to go into. And equally, many um OTs, speech and language therapists, and EPs tend to go private pretty quickly because it's significantly better for them in terms of financial sort of comeback, really. So they they seek that that sort of private sector stuff, which is why we have a significant issue when we have parents turning towards the private sector. The waiting list is a lot less, they can get the description of needs a lot quicker and therefore get help without having to wait so long for it. And there's a very, very sneaky little change that was spotted about the way the experts at hand were described. The wording started off as the experts at hand, I can't remember the exact wording, but it basically implied that the experts at hand would be in classrooms. And then the wording was changed. It was a piece of um, I think it was it was press release, either on the the DFE's social media or in a in a sort of article, and it started off with in classrooms and then it was changed to uh be available to schools. And that change seems very, very small, but it is hugely significant. Because are these experts at hand simply going to be, I don't know, sort of experts you can call upon via email or a conference call, or are these experts going to observe children and environments? Because the two are very, very different. And if we're if we're talking about the effectiveness of these inclusion bases, particularly if the young person is struggling in an inclusion base, they are seeking a route into a specialist provision. And the government again say, right, well, you're gonna have to have been seen by an expert at hand before you can come near an EHCP. Are those experts even going to be on on the coal face as such, on the ground with with this? It's not clear from the wording.

SPEAKER_05 33:20

No, and I think the quantity needed, like you say, it's a great in in practice in uh theory, it's great. And I read that and thought, now that actually, if it actually happened, would have a that would really would genuinely make a huge difference if it is successful. But the numbers that they're looking at recruiting over three years, there's 24,000 mainstream schools across across the country, and it works out at between four and six hundred ed psyches a year coming through from next year. But like you say, there's no guarantees they will go into the education sector. So again, it's quite vague. But it also that makes me think a little bit about again, like I mentioned earlier, the changes in the SCND code of practice. I'm really concerned around that because whilst I think it's fantastic, they're now acknowledging that um executive function is is a need, and I think that's really welcome. Something that's sort of going under the radar, and I saw a great blog about it this morning, is the move from SEMH to just social and emotional needs. And there's some concerns around what that will mean and what will be included in an EHCP, and that many of those mental health needs, which currently in a special aesthetic, they provide for very well, they have in-house therapists pastoral support, but they won't they possibly mean that that won't be included in NHCPs because they want to push it back to the healthcare system, another system which has no capacity. And this in itself could water down the value of an EHCP and also leave specialist provision without the funding they need to keep those specialists on hand that they have built in since that category was brought in about 12 years ago. So there's there's small changes like that that need really need unpicking and need more scrutiny.

Accountability Complaints And Ofsted

Dr Olivia 35:13

And that brings kind of like what is the accountability that they're talking about? Because right now there isn't a lot of accountability for send in schools, and it's you know, there's send registers, there's there's a lot of ambiguity and a lot of difference between school settings. What kind of, you know, how will parents know if schools are actually going to be, you know, fulfilling their duties using the funding? I hear all the time about funding being reallocated to different areas. How does it look at how does this white paper look at that situation?

SPEAKER_04 35:41

So there's two main routes. Um, I would say there's the the sort of cut through the the fluff in the rest of this. I was trying so hard to be diplomatic. Um the first main route is the government are proposing a bit of an overhaul of the complaints process. So at the moment, again, complete lottery. Um, schools have to have complaints policies and they have to follow a basic premise of how that has to look. You know, if you have to complain about the head teacher, you complain to the head of governors, otherwise, you complain to the head teacher and you've got to do it informally first, and then the stage one and stage two. That generally is the premise of most schools, complaints policies. But um the government are proposing that it's much more, again, homogenised so that it's less of a complete lottery between parents as to what happens when you complain. Um, it needs to be a lot more clear-cut and streamlined and digitalized as well. Um, and then the other route um is through Ofsted. So for the first time, Ofsted are including inclusion as part of their judgments. There's been a new Ofsted framework that's just come out uh in 2025, um, and it's very different. My little girls' school is one of the first schools to be um inspected by the new framework, and it is very different to anything you're used to. All the all the language about standing and good and stuff is gone, and and it's very different. Um, but they're proposing to bring in an inclusion element. So um Ofsted are directly holding schools to account. Now, this is again a bit of a problem for me because it's very challenging at the moment for a parent to have their concerns heard with Ofsted. If you actually ever try to go straight to Ofsted with a concern, um, they often basically say no, um, this isn't the right route, uh, unless there's a significant safeguarding issue that you have to whistleblow on. It's a bit different, the process is a bit different, and it can be quite challenging. And equally, teachers find Ofsted very challenging too. And if we're looking at we want to bring more teachers into the profession, you only have to sort of look on Google about teachers and Ofsted. And there's been some really high-profile, very, very sad cases, and it doesn't feel like the right route when there's existing legal sort of right of reply around accountability. Why are we removing that? There's nothing wrong with the law, it just feels like we're making it harder. And the whole point about the white paper, it's meant to be less adversarial. But for me, this creates more adversity because you haven't got anywhere else to turn. If you feel that the school in particular is not understanding your child's needs, is trying to tell you that it's a parenting problem and all of these things that we hear so often. Where else can you turn? Um, and I don't think Ofsted is going to be the answer. I don't know what you think as a parent, Sarah.

SPEAKER_05 38:38

Oh, I agree absolutely. From an educator's perspective as well, I think that it creates another stick to beat teachers with alongside all of the new targets. What struck me with the paper is it's very target-driven, data driven, putting up, you know, by the end of year one, they want 90% of year one to pass the phonics, they want 75% GLD. Inclusion will now be included in in um Ofsted. They've got new, and and I just feel like, well, hang on a minute. We're setting all these, well, we they are setting these targets and creating these bodies or or routes to hold everyone to account, but they're not giving the structure, the tools it needs to meet these targets. And some of these targets are just so arbitrary. What is the you know, the GLD, the 75%? So five-year-olds do not all develop at the same point and in the same way. And what will happen is with all of this, is that ultimately it increases the pressure on teachers and on leaders to work to the expectation of a percentage target or of an offstead visit, as opposed to actually, this is what my school needs, this is what my children need. So I'm not convinced by that either.

Dr Olivia 39:54

Yeah, I couldn't agree more.

SPEAKER_05 39:56

A lot of bureaucracy for bureaucracy's stake, and and yes, yes, because I just feel you know, you can set all the targets in the world, but you're not going to meet them if you haven't got the steps to get there. Yeah, there's a reason that these targets keep not being met, you know? Funnily enough, exactly what happens in an EHCP half the time.

SPEAKER_04 40:16

Um unreachable outcomes because the provision isn't being provided.

SPEAKER_05 40:21

It's exactly the same. So yes, it is, it is exactly the same. It's setting targets, unreachable outcomes, and not there's no action actually taking place to help them get there.

Dr Olivia 40:30

So it tells that fundamentally this white paper, although it has some nice things on the outsides of it, it's underfunded, under-resourced, and isn't going to be deliver able to deliver on anything, is basically what I'm getting from this conversation.

SPEAKER_05 40:46

Unfortunately, I do think that. And I think you know, all 127, 28 pages of it, I read through, you know, diligently and highlighted and read it again. Um, it's essentially word soup, is the way I would describe it. It's quite repetitive, it consistently um just repeats the same phrases. Adaptive teaching is used as a buzzword without any actual substance.

SPEAKER_04 41:11

And what one of my biggest things, because I'm a word fiend, um, I think is the best way to describe me. I hate its title so much. Um, achieving achieving and thriving. Right. I've described being the other way around. Thriving, then achieving.

SPEAKER_02 41:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 41:30

Because you can that title where the emphasis is it's I want to meet the target and then I can say that they're thriving. Uh-uh. It's exactly the same as attendance. Attendance is a byproduct of met need. It is a happy accident that occurs when a child is safe, secure, and have their needs met. It should never be the lead target. Oh, you know, you can't attend, right? Okay, let's get a six-week programme in place. Week one, 10%, week two, 20%, week three, third. It's completely the wrong way of going about it. And it's the same thing. We have to have thriving children before they can achieve, not the other way around. Bit of a bugbear of mine, that one.

SPEAKER_05 42:12

Yeah, absolutely, Kelly. And if we're going to have children that thrive, ultimately there needs to be a radical rethink of the education system. It is still set in a Victorian age with children in rows and zero tolerance behaviour policies. And until the fundamentals of what happens in a school on a daily basis and the environments children are in are changed, they can put out as many papers as they like. It's not going to make a difference.

SPEAKER_04 42:39

Take a look at, for example, places like Finland.

unknown 42:42

Yes.

SPEAKER_04 42:42

We are having this paper is Finland proposals on a budget that is like I was going to name a popular supermarket that um is is is famous for its duplications of other supermarkets things. It's Finland on a that supermarket budget, you know what I mean? And Finland is exceptionally good at inclusion, real true inclusion, but it's uh it's a lot more flexible in terms of things like uniforms, starting time, finishing time, all of those things. Um, but we can't do it on a budget that's like not there.

SPEAKER_05 43:18

And I think that makes me question, you know, who are they actually consulting with? Because there are many very well educated, knowledgeable professionals out there who know send like the backs of their hands, and then I don't feel that they're being included in these conversations. You know, there's a whole petition around play and provision, play provision in key stage one, no mention of that anywhere in this reform paper, and actually that in itself would make a huge difference. So, who is being consulted with? Because it doesn't feel like it's the people who have actually been inside the system.

Dr Olivia 43:54

But there is an opportunity, as we started the conversation with, for people to by make Was it May 17th or 18th? I think 18th. May 18th. So I think, you know, our voices will our voices be heard? Can families' voices be heard? What is your general? Because I know there's a kind of apathy because we you wonder if your voice can be heard. Do you think people's voices can be heard if they do speak out and answer these 39 questions?

SPEAKER_05 44:20

There's always power in numbers. And when you look at history and you know, you look at these these big events that have happened, and you know, you think holistically about it, it took numbers and it took coming together and bringing voices together to make change, you know, all the way from women's rights and the power to vote to things that we see now. So I think it's easy to fall into that. Well, what difference can I make? But every single response to that consultation paper, every time you see a post that resonates on social media, the DFE, they see this. It does, it slowly chips away. And I think that's what we have to remember that collectively we are a community and we are a powerful one, and we have to keep pushing. It was only 40 years ago that children who were autistic were being sort of tied up in in medical settings and experimented on, and we have come so far because of the power of parents and because of the power of the educators and the people inside the system. So you don't underestimate the power of your voice, is something I would say to every single person who's invested.

Dr Olivia 45:28

That is inspiring and it's action-driven. I think, you know, because a lot of a lot of our parents are also neurodiverse. So it it's great, you know, when we hyper-focus, we hyper-focus, you know. So basically, yeah.

Q&A EOTIS And Evidence That Holds

Dr Olivia 45:41

It's a it's a really good thing. All right, I want to open it up for questions now to the audience. So please raise your hand. I know that Charlotte, I think you had a question that you were going to ask, if my memory serves me correctly.

SPEAKER_03 45:51

She might not be listening to me right now. Yeah, my big question was really about responding to the white paper.

SPEAKER_02 45:58

And I think most of that's been answered. There was somebody in the group last night on the chat though, wasn't there? And I think their question was about EOTAS. And once again, I think you've questioned that you know, you've answered that question. Really.

Dr Olivia 46:14

All right, anyone else with any questions? This is your opportunity to speak to Sarah or Kelly. I know it's sometimes hard to put your hand up, but if anyone has any questions, now's your time.

SPEAKER_00 46:25

So we are in a process of appealing section, all sections actually, yeah? BFNI. We're asking for your task based on multiple uh professional recommendations. My question is now I know the law didn't change. Obviously, we keep going with that, but at this stage, I'm concerned that local authority will push my son back into a mainstream, which already they admitted it's not suitable to a stage two complaint response. Where that leaves me, where do I go for the evidence to to at least at some stage uh make sure that when he's ready mentally, because at the moment he's not able to actually get the placement in a specialist school, because by the look of it, it it looks like we're just going to be pushed all in mainstream back.

SPEAKER_04 47:15

This is going to be a bit of a cop-out answer, but it's sort of a bit hard to predict at the moment. Um, not because of the white paper so much, but more so your child's needs. Now, with IOTIS, it is by definition, education otherwise than in school, is defined in section 61, where no school or college can meet a young person's needs. And generally, the purpose of the annual review is to, as it says on the tin, review the needs of the young person annually. And it's quite hard at this point when you when you're in tribunal, you haven't got a finalised plan yet or a decision about IOTIS. It's therefore quite difficult to predict how this might look for you in the future. What I'd recommend, though, is if you are successful at tribunal and you do get a IOTIS, is the quality of sort of regular evidence gathering is massively important. So before every annual review, um, you need to ensure that a member of the team around your child who isn't you, because you're not legally obligated to do anything with regard to EOTIS, somebody on your child's team holds termly meetings where the appropriateness of everything is evaluated, even if the local authority declined to join in, you keep the evidence yourself, you show up to annual review with a horde of experts who are saying we need to we need this to carry on. And, you know, if at some time in the future you feel that that a return to school is best, the best thing to do is not even think in terms of specialist or mainstream, but think more about what is the school that is right for my young person. And that's the bit that at the moment you can't necessarily predict, because the whole purpose of being on EOTIS is meant to be so that your child's needs are met. And in say a year, two years, three years, and and three years sort of is where we're we're ballparking in terms of the white paper kicking in and then the the emphasis on mainstream. It's so hard to predict what those needs are going to look like, because hopefully having EOTIS meeting need for like two years beforehand will make a real tangible difference to the well-being, progress, and happiness of your child. So it's really, really hard to say, but I totally understand why you'd be worried. Being forewarned is forearmed. So by that I mean collect loads of evidence all the time from everybody, including yourself. Keep logs, keep tracks, everything.

SPEAKER_05 49:49

Sorry, do you have any just the only thing I want to add to that, because it's exactly what I would have said, particularly around the evidence trail. I mean it really is crucial. But think now about how you are collating that, because I have work with a lot of parents and they have got thousands of emails, and it can become really quite stressful trying to wade through all that. So just you know, make sure in your emails, for example, you have a folder that it's just for the correspondence back and forwards from the LA or from the school. Make sure that you know, when you get any emails come through of documents, that you save them, file them, immediately put a date on them because I I'm the first one to admit that I wish to goodness I had done that with my daughter because it ended up in I had to sit and spend days and days and days trolling through and creating these systems. And if it had been in place from the beginning or as early as possible, it really does save you a lot of stress day later down the line. So evidence, evidence, log every conversation, follow everything up in writing as well. If you have a verbal conversation, make sure you then put that in an email to follow up or a formal letter and then save it somewhere that it's really clear and easy to access.

Dr Olivia 51:00

And there's actually a podcast I'm doing next week with someone who's created something called a bundle creator where you can keep evidence and he's got like a tube map for the different pathways you can take. So if you're going through a tribunal or if you're starting an EHCP, and at each stop he tells you what documentation you need to have and helps you to collate it, which I thought, wow, I wish I'd had that. Um so it's yeah, it's it's it's worth looking at, Marianne, and that'll be coming out next Tuesday. But um, because it especially because again, because we're also neurodiverse, it's really hard to keep track of that stuff. It's really, really difficult. It's easier said than done. So thank you for that advice, Sarah and Kelly. And I just, you know, I think that's all that we have time for because I know Kelly has to run, but I want to say a big thank you to both of you for all of your information and um really explaining things in a way that's understandable. So a big thanks. Uh thank you for having me.

SPEAKER_04 51:52

Yeah, same. Thank you very much. And we hope it's been really helpful. And yeah, we're we're always around. You can find us both on LinkedIn and social media and all those places. Um, so do give us a shout if you need any more specific support because we're both sort of well positioned to provide.

Closing Notes Knowledge Is Power

SPEAKER_05 52:11

Yeah, and just I suppose just a parting a parting thought, really, is just you know, don't forget that nothing in the report changes the most important thing. And the most important thing is understanding your child is the starting point for everything. Knowledge is power. So read the books. I hear Dr. Olivia's got a very good one coming out quite soon. You know, don't be shy. Take those books to the teachers, to the educators as well. They're always happy to be signposted. Feel free to signpost them to me, obviously, or to the wonderful Sunshine Support. But you know, knowledge is power, we're a big community, and you know, collectively, we've got this.