It has taken time to work through the government’s SEND reform proposals in detail. As both a parent and foster parent of children with special educational needs and disabilities, I was particularly interested in what the proposals might mean for care-experienced children.
But one thing quickly became clear to me, for a group of children who are significantly more likely to have SEND than their peers, care-experienced children are largely invisible in the School’s White Paper. So invisible, in fact, that I found myself using the search function to check whether they had been mentioned at all.
But why does that absence matter?
When policy overlooks a group, practice often follows
Despite well-established evidence that both looked-after and previously looked-after children have higher rates of SEND, the reforms barely acknowledge them. Latest Department for Education data shows that over half of children in care have a special educational need, compared to around 18% of the general pupil population a finding supported by the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory. The only meaningful reference in the reforms appears in relation to oversight, where the Children’s Commissioner is expected to monitor outcomes for groups including “children in care” and “children in need” and previously looked after children are not even explicitly mentioned.
This was an obvious opportunity to recognise their distinct needs, and once again, it has been missed.
This matters because what is not named in policy is rarely prioritised in practice. If care-experienced children are not explicitly recognised within the framework, there is no clear expectation for local authorities, schools or health services to adapt systems to meet their needs. In a system already under pressure, this increases the risk that they will be treated as part of the general SEND population, rather than as a group with known additional vulnerabilities. The result is predictable: gaps in identification, weaker accountability, and support that fails to reflect the realities of children whose lives do not follow straightforward pathways.
Early identification
The reforms place strong emphasis on improving early identification in early years settings, which is welcome in principle. In practice, however, it raises serious concerns for care-experienced children. Early instability is strongly linked to delayed identification of SEND, and many children move placements frequently in their early years. With permanence often not secured until several years into childhood, some children will miss consistent early years provision altogether. Others arrive in permanent families with fragmented or incomplete histories.
This raises important questions about how early years settings will deliver on these ambitions. How will they support children who are not attending consistently, or who move between local authorities? How will information be shared effectively when children are transitioning between foster care, kinship care and permanent families? And how confident are early years practitioners in understanding the complex overlap between trauma, attachment needs and conditions such as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) or autism?
These are not marginal issues. Children with SEND are already more likely to have experienced adversity, including being in care. Without addressing this intersection, the reforms risk reinforcing, rather than reducing, existing inequalities.
Information gaps and missing expertise
The proposed digital Inclusion Support Plan (ISP)is intended to improve continuity, but continuity is precisely what is disrupted for many looked-after and adopted children. When a child is adopted, their identity changes, and links to previous records may be restricted or difficult to access. Many adopted children are already school-aged and may have an existing support plan or EHCP before adoption. It is unclear how these plans will transfer when a child’s identity changes or when there are placement moves, and whether vital information could be lost in the process. Without clear safeguards, there is a real risk that children will effectively have to start again, leading to further delays in support.
The reforms also introduce an “Experts at Hand” model, but there is little clarity about which experts this includes. Care-experienced children frequently access highly specialised support through local authorities, adoption agencies, therapeutic social workers and clinicians with expertise in trauma and attachment. These professionals are often uniquely placed to understand the intersection between social care and SEND, yet there is no indication that they will be included in this model.
This reflects a wider concern already raised in SNJ coverage about how “expert” input is being framed within the reforms. As highlighted in Shutting down debate: The Government’s use of ‘Experts’ for SEND reform, there are real questions about whose expertise is recognised and whose is excluded. If therapeutic and social care expertise is left out, we risk reinforcing the very silos that families already struggle against.
Simplifying SEND at the expense of complexity
The proposed fast-track route to an EHCP for children under five with complex needs appears promising (even if the plans for EHCPs themselves aren’t), but again, care-experienced children may be among those least likely to benefit. Delays in identification caused by instability, disrupted early development and gaps in early records mean many will not be recognised early enough to qualify. Given what we know about these children’s experiences, there is a strong argument that fast-track access should be extended to all care-experienced children, rather than limited to those identified early.
There is also a degree of logic in moving away from diagnosis-led systems of support (which we often now have, even though the Children and Families Act 2014 actively legislated against it). However, the proposed specialist support packages raise serious practical concerns. Care-experienced children are particularly likely to have overlapping and interacting needs, especially in the area of social, emotional and mental health. A child might present with social, emotional or mental health (SEMH) needs, Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) and dyslexia, alongside the impacts of trauma and disrupted attachment. Trying to fit such complexity into a single package risks oversimplifying what is required.
Concerns about this aspect of the reforms have already been raised. As SNJ argued in Why “Specialist Provision Packages” are a Trojan horse, reducing EHCP rights, there is a real risk that these packages could limit provision rather than tailor it to individual needs. For care-experienced children in particular, whose profiles rarely fit neatly into one category, this could be especially problematic.
Although the reforms acknowledge that a small number of children have low incidence, high complexity needs, there is little detail about how those needs will be met. At the same time, there is a tightening of expectations around specialist provision. This is concerning, given that some of the most vulnerable children rely on highly specialised settings that are already under pressure.
When rights weaken and responsibility disappears
More broadly, SNJ’s analysis has consistently pointed to the tension at the heart of these reforms: rights appear to be reframed, and in some cases reduced. As explored in our initial take on the plans, “The SEND reforms in the Schools White Paper reveal rights given – and rights stripped away“, changes to the system risk altering not just how support is delivered, but the legal protections underpinning it.
Another unresolved issue is how the system will work for children who are not in school. Care-experienced children are at higher risk of missing education or being outside the school system altogether. If schools are expected to take the lead in developing EHCPs, it is unclear who will fulfil this role for children who are electively home-educated or receiving education otherwise than at school (EOTAS). These are often among the most vulnerable children, and a lack of clarity here risks further marginalising them.
When placement decisions move out of families’ hands
The proposed changes to EHCP placement decisions also have significant implications. Currently, looked-after and previously looked-after children benefit from priority in school admissions, but this does not apply once an EHCP is in place. Under the new system, parental choice may be restricted to schools offering a particular support package, and tribunals may only be able to tell local authorities to remake decisions, rather than direct placements.
This concern sits alongside wider fears about changes to tribunal powers and accountability, which have been strongly voiced across the sector. As argued in accountability group, Measure What Matter’s article, Not in our name: how proposed SEND reforms risk breaking the social contract, many see these reforms as fundamentally reshaping the balance of rights between families and the state.
For care-experienced children who may need to change schools due to placement moves, these changes could make it even more difficult to secure an appropriate place quickly. It undermines the very principle of priority access that exists to support them.
Taken together, these issues point to a broader and familiar problem: the failure to join up SEND and social care systems meaningfully. Care-experienced children sit at the intersection of these systems, and when that intersection is overlooked, they are left navigating gaps that should not exist.
Care-experienced children are not a marginal group within SEND. They are overrepresented, often underserved, and too frequently overlooked in policy design. If these reforms are to deliver workable change, they must take account of children whose lives do not follow straightforward pathways.
Otherwise, the risk is that those who most need a responsive and joined-up system will continue to be the ones least well served by it.
With thanks to Rebecca Brooks, Policy and Research Advisor at Adoption UK. Advice specifically for adoptive and kinship carers on filling in the consultation forms can be found here.
Disabled Children’s Rights are Under Attack.
We’re fighting, but we can’t do it alone: we need your help more than ever.
We’re volunteer-run, but costs are rising. To help us keep going, please consider a one-off or, if it’s possible, a regular donation.
Read more about being a regular donor here.
We use Zeffy to fundraise, which doesn’t charge us a fee, so 100% of your donation reaches us.
Key Content
Also read:
- Beyond EHCPs: Why Inclusion Needs More Than a Document
- The Unacceptable Truth: 20 SEND legal rights at risk from the Government’s SEND reforms
- How health and family support systems are failing children starting school
- WEBINAR RECORDING! The implications for children’s legal rights to EHCPs and EOTAS of the Government’s SEND proposals
- When things go right: Shining a light on SEND Practitioners making a positive impact [Giveaway!]
- From suspicion to support: why the Government’s child protection reforms matter for disabled children
- Have your say on the future of transport for disabled children and young people
- Unison voices major concerns over SEND reform health plans for sick and disabled children out of school in the EOTAS consultation
- Top Tips for the EOTAS & EHCP consultation: Protect your child’s rights to statutory SEND support
- Navigating constraints: Why a former PCF chair thinks the current model is missing the mark for families
- Dear Secretary of State for Education, Lucy Powell: an Open Letter from Special Needs Jungle and SEND legal charity SOS!SEN
- Research: Disabled young people define inclusive education as “learning in the place that’s right for them”
- The Unacceptable Truth: 20 SEND legal rights at risk from the Government’s SEND reforms
- WEBINAR RECORDING! The implications for children’s legal rights to EHCPs and EOTAS of the Government’s SEND proposals
- Unison voices major concerns over SEND reform health plans for sick and disabled children out of school in the EOTAS consultation
- Top Tips for the EOTAS & EHCP consultation: Protect your child’s rights to statutory SEND support
- What might the SEND reform proposals mean for specialist tutors, alternative provision and EOTAS?
- When Home-to-School Transport Doesn’t Fit: The Reality of Section 19 EOTAS
- EOTAS Consultation: A further assault on children’s SEND rights with cost saving and reintegration to schools at its heart
- Allergy Guidance issued—but wider medical conditions guidance back for more work
- ARFID: Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder is much more than just “fussy eating”
- Draft medical conditions guidance raises “serious concerns” says union, over shift in clinical responsibilities to schools
- SEND reforms: Where are care-experienced children?
- Part 2: The Invisible Lifeline: Why EOTAS is Non-Negotiable for the ‘Sanctuary Cohort’
Don’t miss a thing!
Don’t miss any posts from SNJ – simply add your email address below. You must click the link in the confirmation email you’ll receive to activate your free subscription.
You can also keep up with us by following our
Want more? Be an SNJ regular donor!
SNJ is a non-profit and everyone who writes here does so voluntarily. We need your support to help us with costs by donating once or as a regular patron. Find out more here
Previously Renata has been at the forefront of successfully changing government policy so interventions are needs-led and no longer diagnosis-led, and creating the world’s first specialist nurse for undiagnosed children at Great Ormond Street Hospital.
She also helped establish and grow the first online support community for families of undiagnosed children and spearheaded the very first undiagnosed children’s awareness day, including producing information videos that were shown in parliament.
She is a regular speaker on TV and at events, is an RSA Fellow and the mother of three children with disabilities, two of whom have complex needs and one of whom also has complex medical needs.
Please share this article!
Discover more from Special Needs Jungle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
