It’s an old saying about bureaucracies: bad news doesn’t make it to the top until it’s too late. That applies doubly to SEND, particularly when that bad news comes from parents. Let’s take the case of Kent, for example…
Kent’s SEND services were inspected by Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission in 2019, and were revisited in 2022. Inspectors identified nine areas of significant weakness. Ofsted & CQC then handed the SEND improvement baton over to the Department for Education (DfE) and NHS England.
The DfE issued a formal improvement notice to Kent in early 2023. But in July 2024, a new Labour DfE minister lifted that notice, on advice that Kent “was able to demonstrate evidence of considerable progress since the IN was issued.”
One of the significant weaknesses identified in the Ofsted / CQC inspection was the local area’s relationship with parent carers: “a widely held concern of parents that the local area is not able, or in some cases not willing, to meet their children’s needs.”
The inspectors that conducted the 2022 re-visit received almost 2000 responses from parent carers. Three-quarters of them said they weren’t supported by the local area in identifying and providing the right SEND support. So the LA had a lot to do to set things right. They set out an improvement plan, known as an Accelerated Progress Plan. You can find the first version of this plan on Kent County Council’s website, here.
Councils in Kent’s situation normally publish updated versions of their Accelerated Progress Plans over time, to show the people they serve how they are performing against agreed goals: Kent has not done this.
Have parents seen any improvements?
Kent uses data from a range of sources to demonstrate the progress it’s making in sorting out its SEND services. Surveys are an important part of this. One of these is a rolling survey that the LA issues to parent carers, asking them about their experiences of the Kent SEND system over the last 12 months, and what improvement they’d seen.
The first of these surveys went out to parent carers in early 2024. The survey asked parents about their experiences of the Kent SEND system over the last 12 months.
According to Kent, the LA communicated the results of the survey to DfE and NHS England improvement advisers in April 2024. The LA also summarised the results of the survey to Kent parent carers in a May 2024 newsletter.
There were over 400 responses. So what did the survey say?
In the May 2024 newsletter, Kent summarised parents’ comments, explaining what the local area was doing about the issues raised, in a standard ‘you said / we did’ format.
The LA’s summary of parental voice raised some deep concerns locally, and we’ve seen the data that parents submitted to the survey. It looks like they were right to be concerned. What follows is a compilation of Kent’s summary of parental voice, set against some actual parental responses from the survey. We’ve lightly edited some of these responses (for example, by expanding out acronyms or for clarity), but they’re otherwise as submitted.
Kent’s Summary Point 1
You said: Your response rates are too long.
We did: We have introduced an initiative called Talk Tuesdays where our SEND team dedicate time to respond to parents by email or phone (it isn’t only Tuesdays!). We are continuously updating Kent’s Local Offer so that useful information is readily available, and the SEND Enquiries Hub are there to help parents with their queries.
Actual survey responses about response rates:
- “Appalling. It is impossible to get a response from anyone in the SEN team. The communication hub does not work, there’s no response from the complaints department, no allocated caseworker. Our social worker called managers twice and was promised issues would be addressed but I heard nothing. My son is nearly 13 and still has no final EHCP for KS3 (only for KS2).”
- “Caseworker – AMAZING – SEND system utter rubbish, no school, no education NOTHING, lack of communication, failure to complete review in 20 weeks (currently 24 weeks), amendments no done – EHCP was not changed/edited from PRIMARY SCHOOL, Failure after failure.” [Parent of KS4 pupil]
- “Horrendous. 2 children with EHCP. No review amendments made or acknowledged. No idea who to even contact at KCC. The new “hub” is just a gatekeeper service and not worth the money, they are useless and just create case numbers and they say no recourse for 28 days. Another obstacle to stop parents speaking directly to who they need to.”
- “Dreadful! The worst it’s been in 10 years! No one answers calls, change of provision takes months of no education, EHCP no [law] upheld correctly, shocking! Send emails get replies eight weeks later if at all the new hub is ridiculous and does not work, my children have been severely let down and they have been failed by KCC.”
- “13 caseworkers in two-and-a-half years, multiple failures to meet statutory requirements and deadlines, 4 complaints unanswered at stage 1 preventing access to justice, a Reassessment that took over 100 weeks to complete, obstruction of appeal by withholding a final EHCP, and one threat of Judicial Review required to get provision that hasn’t been received for 2 years. It has got worse year on year and it is clear from caseworker turnover that the working environment is toxic. The last 12 months have been particularly awful with utter chaos and incredibly poor communication.”
- “The EHCP process was stressful, although our caseworker when it was finalised and placement was being named went out her way to update us which we were grateful for. Communication is key.”
- “KCC have been amazing at getting my child’s EHCP and finding a place in mainstream school with an Specialist Resource Provision. XXX is amazing and kept me up to date the whole way through. Unfortunately, this has been let down by the school who have made it obvious they don’t want my child there.”
- “We have seen no evidence of any improvement to the system. It took 8 months for KCC SEND to look at the paperwork from our child’s annual review despite us chasing repeatedly because of the urgency of the matter. It then took a further six weeks to respond to our reply to the draft.”
Kent’s Summary Point 2
You said: We want more opportunities to feedback on the service.
We did: We have introduced the new parent/carer survey which we’ll be running each time (three times a year) where you can share your feedback. We’re always keen to hear your views and suggestions and regularly run surveys and consultations about different topics. You can find out more about this on our website. We also work closely with Kent PACT [the local Parent Carer Forum] to listen to the feedback they share with us from parents and carers. We also share your feedback through this newsletter and social media channels.
Actual survey responses: We found no survey responses stating that parent carers want more service feedback opportunities from Kent.
Kent’s Summary Point 3
You said: Incorrect information is being shared across SEND teams.
We did: All our teams are now working closely together to make sure information is recorded and shared consistently.
Actual survey responses:
- “EP appointment was organised with little notice (3 hours) but accepted it. When I then chased my EHC case worker for a copy of the report they sent me it – but this wasn’t actually my child’s but another child’s, which I promptly reported to them. They apologised and sent the correct report but failed to acknowledge their GDPR breach. Once it was agreed to issue an EHCP, it took a further 6 weeks of phone calls to even get a draft, I requested a couple of amendments which I was told was done. This was sent to the school I asked for and they agreed to meet needs and my EHC worker agreed to name this school. When I received the final EHCP I was shocked to see the amendments I had asked for on the draft to still be there. The incompetence of the whole process is shocking and completely unfair KCC have not made any progress to fix the problems within SEND services and are actually making it worse. There is no human you can discuss concerns with no one wants to take responsibility.”
- “EHCP issued late and even then it was a direct and incorrect copy and paste from previous ones. Only sent out for phase transfer 3 weeks before the deadline and, no surprise, they didn’t then meet the deadline. Now we are 6 weeks post deadline for secondary placement, with no place, communication terrible. Caseworker off sick but the manager didn’t reassign so I had no way to progress until they returned. They returned after 3 weeks off from Covid and then a few days later go on holiday. I’m told it would have gone to panel but no way to reach anyone for an update. I requested more schools to be consulted but the manager refused. This will be going to tribunal.”
- “Absolutely appalling! KCC wrongly assumed my daughter was already in school so now we are currently without a R class placement for her for September 2024”
- “EP report completed as part of EHC needs assessment was extremely poor. My child was referred to as different child numerous times and even the wrong date of birth and age was used.”
- “For my child, I have always had very good response to any questions I have asked KCC. The EHCP process/updates has always been smooth running and we are just grateful as parents there is such a system and support available for children like my son.”
Kent’s Summary Point 4
You said: We do not provide enough information.
We did: We are always working on our SEND Information Hub (Local Offer) website to make sure information is correct. When we send letters/emails to parents, we signpost to the relevant pages of the website and provide contact details if more support is required.
Actual survey responses:
- “We get regular newsletters – but there is nothing about post-16 on it. The local offer does not index well enough to be useful – too much time sifting through information. All I want is a KCC-led programme that I use- as I know it will be trusted source- we just don’t know about the quality if it’s from a charity.”
- “Absolutely terrible. The lack of communication from the SEN team is appalling. Complaint system is a joke and you wait 3-4 months for a response. Insufficient information available for parents. Lack of care from staff. Lack of SEN placements leaving children for up to 18months or more waiting for a school. Utter disgrace.”
- “No difference to before, a broken system with inadequate levels of delivery and support a revolving door of staff and very rarely an ability to access human support from properly qualified people. We had to make several attempts to even get a name for our case worker and attempts for further support or involvement are either met with silence or (eventually) unhelpful or (in some cases) incorrect information from untrained underqualified staff who rarely last long enough to have any continuity for any enquiry or plea for help.”
- “Still delays, but someone actually picks up the phone or responds in an email. There is more accurate information available for parents. It’s not quite there but seen improvements when talking to other families.”
Kent’s Summary Point 5
You said: There is a lack of training for staff.
We did: We are constantly updating our available training for staff and schools. We provide them with feedback opportunities to understand their needs and base new and refreshed training around this. We are also developing a training directory for schools which will give them full access to training and resources. We have invested £3m in training over the last three years and our core teams are now 95% filled by permanent staff. This has reduced our reliance on temporary staff, and the newly trained skills are therefore retained within the workforce.
Actual survey responses:
- “Appalling, multiple staff and departments aware that EHCP not being implemented and completely failing to reply to communications from myself or school. Staff are poorly trained, do not understand their own systems and seem to accept their own incredibly low standards while wasting time and money avoiding simple solutions. Could not have a lower opinion.”
- “My son’s school receive High Needs Funding to support him. He has one-to-one support, but there is not the level of understanding around autism in school for him to be properly supported and the environment is not inclusive. The adults supporting him are either inexperienced, have not had adequate training, or hold fixed negative mindsets about autism (or a combination of any of these).”
- “No difference to before, a broken system with inadequate levels of delivery and support a revolving door of staff and very rarely an ability to access human support from properly qualified people. We had to make several attempts to even get a name for our case worker and attempts for further support or involvement are either met with silence or (eventually) unhelpful or (in some cases) incorrect information from untrained underqualified staff who rarely last long enough to have any continuity for any enquiry or plea for help.”
- “Individual pockets of people trying to help but mostly a system that is confusing, under resourced, poor training and facilities in mainstream schools, parents having to give up full time work to coordinate it all and constantly hitting waiting lists and generalised rules that seem to be put in place regardless of individual diagnosis and needs. Even when a child is in such deep mental distress they have had suicidal ideation and attempt.”
Kent’s Summary Point 6
You said: We do not share good news stories.
We did: We are reaching out to young people, parents and staff, asking them to share any successes or good news they have so we can understand where we are doing well and where we can improve. We are also starting termly parent and school surveys to gather more information that can help us make improvements. Our surveys and good news stories will be shared in feature articles, newsletters and on our social media channels.
None of the actual survey responses raised Kent failing to share good news stories as an issue.
Other Issues: negative sentiments
We ran the unstructured textual responses in Kent’s parent survey through two separate sentiment analysis tools. In both tools, negative feedback returns outnumbered positive feedback returns by ten to one.
The tools identified some extra themes from the survey that Kent failed to summarise. It probably won’t surprise you to learn that legal compliance was one of these – here are a few examples from the survey:
“Absolute shambles . KCC have caused our family significant stress due to not working within the law, being totally unresponsive to contact, lying during contact, deliberately delaying things and their complaint’s process being unfit for purpose. I have nothing good to say about our recent dealings with KCC. KCC have shown zero care or regard for our family.”
“Extremely poor. Statutory processes and timelines are routinely ignored. Staff repeatedly say they are overloaded, it is with a manager, or they have a backlog. There is no regard for the law or these vulnerable children. Things have become worse.”
“Terrible- daughters EHCP was amended and provision removed at annual review with no evidence. We had to go back to tribunal to get the provision originally awarded by tribunal and removed within a year reinstated. Second tribunal reinstated provision awarded by first tribunal. Daughter has missed a lot of education due to no named placement and no alternative provision and is still studying GCSES in year 12. KCC have no regard to the law or the children in their care.”
“Awful. Slow. Illegal. KCC repeatedly downplay and ignore my child’s documented needs. They avoid putting provision in place at every stage. Each stage of the EHCP has been drawn out for months on end. Appalling communication. EHCP was applied for 18 months ago and has STILL not been finalised. My child has had no education in this time period at all.”
“Extremely poor. Statutory processes and timelines are routinely ignored. Staff repeatedly say they are overloaded, it is with a manager, or they have a backlog. There is no regard for the law or these vulnerable children. Things have become worse.”
Reasonable adjustments?
Parents were also asked about the adjustments that schools had put in place to help meet their child’s needs. These were generally positive, with respondents frequently contrasting the quality and attitude of support from Kent’s schools with the support that they’d received from Kent LA:
“New SENCO is very aware and person-centred which has made a big difference to our child”
“XXX school is excellent. KCC is where the issues exist.”
“School has implemented all EHCP provision that depends on them. It is KCC who fails to provide services included in the EHCP.”
“The school has been incredibly supportive and he is slowly getting better after 2 years of awful treatment by KCC and a full year without any support or education provided by them.”
“It’s still difficult, and we did feel like we were left to fend for ourselves after her diagnosis, and throughout the years without a diagnosis, which have been horrific. I may paint a positive picture of school support, but it’s been beyond challenging and a full-time job for me to support her daily throughout these years.”
“I had to move my child again. She is now on her third school, they have made adaptations for her brilliantly and she is settled. The school prior with its Specialist Resource Provision would not stick to the necessary adaptations they’d agreed to.”
“The school has implemented a variety of interventions for my child and have referred to Local Inclusion Forum Team for further support, although they are struggling to provide and implement the strategies due to lack of funding.”
Where’s the Improvement?
There’s a Marianas Trench-sized gulf between Kent LA’s summary of this parental survey, and what Kent parents actually told them – particularly when it comes to the depth of their concerns, and their views of the direction of travel of SEND improvement.
Kent says that it shared the findings of this survey with the Department for Education and NHS England. It’s unclear whether that means Kent shared their analysis of the survey, or the actual survey data: the former is more likely. Which would not be good, as in places it’s difficult to differentiate it from turd-polishing.
The Department for Education subsequently decided to lift the notice to improve on Kent’s SEND services. That decision will have been taken for a number of reasons – not just their perception of parental satisfaction, and not just anything that they might have learned through an interpretation of this survey.
However, it is disturbing how little impact adverse family experiences appear to have on the improvement decisions that SEND system leaders make. Time and again, in places like Birmingham and Kent, system leaders pronounce that impressive strides are being made, without anyone on the SEND front line seeing a blind bit of difference.
What’s the situation like where you area?
Also read:
- Chaos, mistrust, poor inclusion, and no communication: How Kent’s SEND provision has failed its disabled children and their families
- An epidemic of SEND school transport failings leaves disabled children at risk and missing school
- Parents of disabled children traumatised by the public bodies that should be supporting them
- Uncovering the hidden truth about SEND safety valve agreements and how they’ll cut children’s SEND provision
- How local SEND campaigners saw off their LA’s SEND Safety Valve plans—and how you can too
- Expert group recommends reducing SEND Tribunal appeals by getting decisions right first time
- Expert group recommends reducing SEND Tribunal appeals by getting decisions right first time
- The Warwickshire councillors are not unique: They’re indicative of growing resentment toward supporting disabled children
- How does the the SEND Improvement Plan intend to create more accountability?
Matt specialises in SEND stats, data analysis, and in-depth investigations of policies. He has given evidence to several Parliamentary Select Committee inquiries, and his articles for SNJ on SEND funding, local government policy, and the SENDIST Tribunal have been quoted in Select Committee inquiry reports and national media.
- Top Tips for the EOTAS & EHCP consultation: Protect your child’s rights to statutory SEND support - August 19, 2026
- Mainstream SEND Funding: A simple explainer, another consultation, and why it really matters - July 22, 2026
- EHCPs 2026: A relentless rise, but who’s surprised? Plus SNJ’s annual LA Hall of Shame - June 27, 2026
Please share this article!
Discover more from Special Needs Jungle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
