Special educational needs and disabilities
Education chapter 5. What an EHC plan is in law, how the statutory process works, how many there are — and what the published data cannot tell you.
What this chapter covers
An EHC plan is a legal document that obliges a local authority to secure named support for a child or young person. This chapter sets out what one is in law, how the statutory process works, how many exist, how long they take, where children with plans are educated, and what the published data does and does not show.
718,838 children and young people had an EHC plan in 2025/26, 12.5% more than the year before.
What this chapter covers
- What the law defines as a special educational need, and where that definition comes from.
- The statutory route from a first concern to a finished plan, and what happens at each decision point.
- How many plans there are, how fast that number is changing, and how the system got here.
- Where children and young people with plans are educated.
- What the published statistics cannot tell you.
What it does not
- Advice about an individual child. This is a statistics site, not an advice service — the sources panel lists organisations that do give advice.
- Any judgement about whether the system is working. That is a political question, and the data on this page is used by every side of it.
- Anything from outside the published record. See the note on sourcing at the foot of the page.
What an EHC plan is
A child or young person has special educational needs if they have a learning difficulty or disability which calls for special educational provision to be made for them. A learning difficulty or disability means either a significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of others the same age, or a disability which prevents or hinders them from making use of facilities generally provided for others of the same age in mainstream settings.
Children and Families Act 2014, section 20 ↗An EHC plan is a legal document maintained by a local authority. It specifies the child or young person’s special educational needs, the outcomes sought, and the special educational provision required. Where the plan specifies special educational provision, the local authority must secure that provision.
Children and Families Act 2014, sections 37 and 42 ↗The framework runs from birth to age 25, covering early years settings, schools, further education and young people educated elsewhere. This is why an EHC-plan count is not a school-pupil count.
Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3 ↗Six things that are commonly assumed and are not the case
Each of these is corrected against the statute or the published statistics, with the section or release named. They are included because they change what a reader takes from the numbers below.
Common misconception
“You need a diagnosis to get an EHC plan.”
What the law says
The legal test is educational need and the provision required to meet it, not a diagnosis. Section 20 defines special educational needs by learning difficulty or disability and the provision called for — it does not require a medical diagnosis, and no diagnosis is by itself a qualification.
Basis: Children and Families Act 2014, section 20; SEND Code of Practice paragraph 6.23 on identifying need rather than labelling.
Children and Families Act 2014, s.20 ↗Common misconception
“Only a school can request an assessment.”
What the law says
A parent, a young person aged 16 to 25, or a school or other institution can make the request directly to the local authority. A family does not need the school to agree, and does not need to go through the school at all.
Basis: Children and Families Act 2014, section 36(1).
Children and Families Act 2014, s.36 ↗Common misconception
“A plan means a special school.”
What the law says
Most children and young people with an EHC plan are not in special schools. The published placement figures on this page show the actual split. The Act also contains a general presumption in favour of mainstream education where a parent has not expressed a preference for a particular setting.
Basis: Children and Families Act 2014, section 33; DfE EHC-plan statistics, placement breakdown.
Children and Families Act 2014, s.33 ↗Common misconception
“A plan is a wish-list — schools do what they can.”
What the law says
Where a plan specifies special educational provision, the local authority must secure it. This is a duty, not a target, and it is not conditional on the authority’s budget.
Basis: Children and Families Act 2014, section 42(2).
Children and Families Act 2014, s.42 ↗Common misconception
“Support stops at 18.”
What the law says
The framework runs to 25. A plan is maintained while the young person is in education or training and the provision is still needed; it does not end automatically at 16, 18 or on leaving school.
Basis: Children and Families Act 2014, sections 45 and 46.
Children and Families Act 2014, s.45 ↗Common misconception
“SEN Support and an EHC plan are the same thing, counted the same way.”
What the law says
They are different statuses and they appear in different statistical releases. EHC plans are published in an all-age 0–25 release; SEN Support is published in the school census, covering school pupils only. Adding or comparing them without saying which population each covers produces a wrong number.
Basis: DfE, Education, health and care plans; DfE, Special educational needs in England. Different populations, different releases.
DfE, Education, health and care plans ↗
The statutory route
Every stage below is a statutory step with a legal test and, in most cases, a legal deadline. Where a decision can be appealed, the appeal route is shown against that decision rather than collected at the end, because the right of appeal attaches to specific decisions and not to the process as a whole.
- 1SEN Support in school
Most children identified with special educational needs are supported by their school without a plan, under a four-part cycle the Code of Practice calls the graduated approach: assess, plan, do, review. A plan is not the entry point to support, and a school cannot require one before it acts.
- 2Request for an EHC needs assessment162,702requests in the latest year
A parent, a young person over 16, or a school or other institution can ask the local authority to carry out an assessment. Others, including health and social-care professionals, can bring a child to the authority’s attention.
- 3Decision whether to assess — 6 weeks
The local authority must decide whether to carry out an assessment and tell the family within six weeks of the request. The test is whether the child may have special educational needs and may need provision through a plan.
If refused: The family can appeal the refusal to assess to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND). Mediation must be considered first, but a family can decline it and still appeal.
- 4The assessment
The authority must seek advice and information from the family, the school or setting, an educational psychologist, health, social care, and anyone else the family reasonably requests. Advice must be provided within six weeks of being asked for.
- 5Decision whether to issue a plan
After assessing, the authority decides whether special educational provision through a plan is necessary. If it decides not to, it must say why.
If refused: A decision not to issue a plan after assessment can also be appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND).
- 6Draft plan and choice of setting
The family receives a draft and has at least 15 days to comment and to say which school or setting they want named. The authority must name that setting unless it would be unsuitable, incompatible with the efficient education of others, or an inefficient use of resources.
- 7Final plan — 20 weeks from the request46.1%issued within 20 weeks
The whole process, from the request arriving to the final plan being issued, must take no more than 20 weeks. A small number of statutory exceptions can extend it.
Right of appeal: The content of a final plan — the description of need, the provision, and the setting named — can be appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND).
- 8Annual review
A plan must be reviewed at least every twelve months. The review can leave the plan unchanged, amend it, or start the process of ceasing it.
- 9Ceasing the plan50,346plans ceased in the latest year
A plan ends when the authority decides the provision is no longer necessary, or when the young person leaves education. There is no automatic end at 18: the plan runs while it is needed, up to 25.
Right of appeal: A decision to cease a plan can be appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND).
Stages without a figure are stages the official release does not publish a volume for. Nothing here is estimated.
Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3; SEND Regulations 2014; SEND Code of Practice 0–25. Volumes shown against the request, final-plan and ceasing stages are from the DfE release and refer to 2025.
How the system got here
This is a record of what was legislated and published, not an assessment of any of it. The 2026 white paper is included because it is published government policy; it is marked as proposal, not law.
1970
Every child becomes entitled to education
The Education (Handicapped Children) Act ended the category of children deemed "unsuitable for education at school" and brought responsibility for their education under local education authorities. Before this, some children were outside the school system entirely.
Education (Handicapped Children) Act 1970 ↗1978
The Warnock Report introduces "special educational needs"
The committee of enquiry chaired by Mary Warnock replaced categories of handicap with the concept of special educational needs, defined by the provision a child requires rather than by a medical label. It is the origin of the framework still in use.
Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People (1978) ↗1981
Statements of special educational needs
The Education Act 1981 implemented Warnock, creating the statutory "statement" — a legally enforceable document setting out a child’s needs and required provision. This is the direct predecessor of the EHC plan.
Education Act 1981 ↗1994
The first Code of Practice
A statutory Code of Practice set out for the first time a staged model of identification and support in schools, with a statement as the final stage.
Code of Practice on the Identification and Assessment of Special Educational Needs (1994)2001
Disability discrimination reaches education
The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 made it unlawful for schools to discriminate against disabled pupils and introduced duties to make reasonable adjustments. These duties now sit in the Equality Act 2010 and run alongside — not inside — the SEND framework.
Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 ↗2010
The Equality Act consolidates disability duties
Disability became one of nine protected characteristics. Schools owe reasonable-adjustment duties to disabled pupils whether or not the pupil has an EHC plan, which is why a child can have rights under the Equality Act and no plan at all.
Equality Act 2010 ↗2014
Statements become EHC plans, and the age range extends to 25
Part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 replaced statements with Education, Health and Care plans, extended the framework from 16 to 25, introduced personal budgets and the local offer, and required education, health and care to plan jointly. Every statistical series on this page that crosses 2014 crosses a definitional break because of this Act.
Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3 ↗2015
School Action and School Action Plus become SEN Support
The two pre-existing school-level categories were merged into a single SEN Support category. The recorded SEN population changed on the definition, and any long percentage series crosses this break.
SEND Code of Practice: 0 to 25 years ↗2019
Parliament examines the 2014 reforms
The Commons Education Committee reported on the implementation of the 2014 Act, and the government announced a cross-department SEND review. Both are part of the published record of how the reformed system was assessed by its own legislature.
House of Commons Education Committee, Special educational needs and disabilities (2019) ↗2023
SEND and alternative provision improvement plan
The government published its response to the SEND review, setting out proposals including national standards and changes to the way places and funding are planned.
DfE, SEND and alternative provision improvement plan (2023) ↗2026
Schools white paper proposes the largest change since 2014
Every child achieving and thriving, published on 23 February 2026, proposed a new statutory individual support plan for every child with SEND in school, alongside retained and revised EHC plans for more intensive support. The government stated that existing EHC plans and protections remain in place until at least September 2030, and announced legislation through an Education for All Bill. Nothing in the white paper has changed the law yet; the statistics on this page describe the system as it currently operates.
DfE, Every child achieving and thriving (2026) ↗
How many plans there are
718,838
Children and young people with a plan
2025/26, census day in January
110,708
New plans started
During 2025
50,346
Plans ceased
During 2025
The number of EHC plans has risen 103% since 2018/19, from 353,995 to 718,838.
Taken on census day each January. The count includes early years, schools, further education and young people educated elsewhere.
Why this series starts here
- 2014 — Legal and definitional. Statements of SEN were replaced by Education, Health and Care plans under the Children and Families Act 2014, and the framework was extended to age 25. Counts before and after 2014 are related but are not the same measure. source ↗
View as table
| Period | Children and young people with an EHC plan |
|---|---|
| 2018/19 | 353,995 |
| 2019/20 | 390,109 |
| 2020/21 | 430,697 |
| 2021/22 | 473,255 |
| 2022/23 | 517,048 |
| 2023/24 | 576,474 |
| 2024/25 | 638,745 |
| 2025/26 | 718,838 |
Why new plans minus ceased plans does not equal the change
The plan count is taken on census day each January; new and ceased plans are counted across the calendar year. Because the two cover different periods, new plans minus ceased plans does not equal the change in the total, and neither figure is wrong.
The plan count is taken on census day each January; new and ceased plans are counted across the calendar year. Because the two cover different periods, new plans minus ceased plans does not equal the change in the total, and neither figure is wrong.
2019
Started53,899Ceased—2020
Started60,097Ceased—2021
Started62,180Ceased—2022
Started66,706Ceased34,7242023
Started84,428Ceased39,4192024
Started97,747Ceased44,8622025
Started110,708Ceased50,346
View as table
| Year | Plans started | Plans ceased |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 53,899 | — |
| 2020 | 60,097 | — |
| 2021 | 62,180 | — |
| 2022 | 66,706 | 34,724 |
| 2023 | 84,428 | 39,419 |
| 2024 | 97,747 | 44,862 |
| 2025 | 110,708 | 50,346 |
A rising count is not the same as rising need
A rise in a category means more children and young people are being recorded with that need as their primary need. It does not by itself show that the underlying prevalence in the population rose by the same amount.
Requests, and the 20-week limit
162,702 requests for an EHC needs assessment were received in 2025. 46.1% of new plans were issued within the 20-week statutory limit in 2025.
The 20-week limit runs from the request arriving to the final plan being issued.
- 201982,329 requests · 60.4% within 20 weeks
- 202075,951 requests · 58% within 20 weeks
- 202193,302 requests · 59.9% within 20 weeks
- 2022114,482 requests · 49.2% within 20 weeks
- 2023138,242 requests · 50.3% within 20 weeks
- 2024154,489 requests · 46.4% within 20 weeks
- 2025162,702 requests · 46.1% within 20 weeks
Blue: requests received, on a common scale. Amber: the share of new plans issued within the statutory 20 weeks, on a 0–100% scale.
View as table
| Year | Requests received | Within 20 weeks (DfE headline) | Within 20 weeks (all cases) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 82,329 | 60.4% | 58.7% |
| 2020 | 75,951 | 58% | 55.6% |
| 2021 | 93,302 | 59.9% | 57.9% |
| 2022 | 114,482 | 49.2% | 47.7% |
| 2023 | 138,242 | 50.3% | 49.1% |
| 2024 | 154,489 | 46.4% | 45.9% |
| 2025 | 162,702 | 46.1% | 45.5% |
Two different 20-week figures are published, and they differ
The Department for Education publishes two measures. Its headline — 46.1% for 2025 — excludes cases where a statutory exception applies. Including every case, the figure is 45.5%. Both are shown above. This page uses the department’s own headline where a single number is quoted, so that the figure here matches the figure in the release, and states the more complete one alongside it. DfE publishes two 20-week measures. The headline excludes cases where an exception applies (for example where the child was absent for an extended period, or key services were closed). Both are shown here: the headline figure matches the department's own release, and the all-cases figure is the more complete count.
Where children and young people are educated
45.5% of children and young people with an EHC plan were in mainstream settings in 2025/26.
“Educated elsewhere” is not a small residual
The release publishes seven settings, not the familiar three. Alongside mainstream, special and further education, it separately counts young people educated elsewhere — including those not in education, employment or training, those educated at home, and those in arrangements made by a local authority or by parents. That group is larger than alternative provision and early years combined, and any account of the system that reports only mainstream and special schools leaves it out.
These are the seven top-level placement categories the EHC-plan release itself publishes. No category is combined or invented, and the shares are of all plans, including young people over 16 in further education and those educated elsewhere.
- Mainstream326,804 (45.5%)
- Special211,442 (29.4%)
- Further education100,815 (14.0%)
- Educated elsewhere62,386 (8.7%)
- Placement not known6,925 (1.0%)
- Alternative provision / PRU5,530 (0.8%)
- Non-maintained early years4,936 (0.7%)
Source: DfE, Education, health and care plans. The categories sum exactly to the published total for this year.
View as table
| Category | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Mainstream | 326,804 | 45.5% |
| Special | 211,442 | 29.4% |
| Further education | 100,815 | 14.0% |
| Educated elsewhere | 62,386 | 8.7% |
| Placement not known | 6,925 | 1.0% |
| Alternative provision / PRU | 5,530 | 0.8% |
| Non-maintained early years | 4,936 | 0.7% |
What the plans are for
The most common primary need recorded was Autistic spectrum disorder, for 226,723 plans in 2025/26.
Each plan is recorded against one primary need. A child may have several; only the primary one appears here, so this is not a count of how many children have each condition.
- Autistic spectrum disorder226,723 (31.5%)
- Speech, language and communication needs160,344 (22.3%)
- Social, emotional and mental health153,880 (21.4%)
- Moderate learning difficulty70,259 (9.8%)
- Physical disability25,501 (3.5%)
- Severe learning difficulty24,538 (3.4%)
- Specific learning difficulty16,949 (2.4%)
- Hearing impairment8,918 (1.2%)
- Profound and multiple learning difficulty8,695 (1.2%)
- NEED_UNKNOWN7,832 (1.1%)
- Other difficulty or disability6,844 (1.0%)
- Visual impairment5,448 (0.8%)
- Multi-sensory impairment1,685 (0.2%)
- Down syndrome1,222 (0.2%)
Source: DfE, Education, health and care plans. Category names are the department's own taxonomy, with abbreviations expanded.
View as table
| Category | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Autistic spectrum disorder | 226,723 | 31.5% |
| Speech, language and communication needs | 160,344 | 22.3% |
| Social, emotional and mental health | 153,880 | 21.4% |
| Moderate learning difficulty | 70,259 | 9.8% |
| Physical disability | 25,501 | 3.5% |
| Severe learning difficulty | 24,538 | 3.4% |
| Specific learning difficulty | 16,949 | 2.4% |
| Hearing impairment | 8,918 | 1.2% |
| Profound and multiple learning difficulty | 8,695 | 1.2% |
| NEED_UNKNOWN | 7,832 | 1.1% |
| Other difficulty or disability | 6,844 | 1.0% |
| Visual impairment | 5,448 | 0.8% |
| Multi-sensory impairment | 1,685 | 0.2% |
| Down syndrome | 1,222 | 0.2% |
This is a record of what was written down
A rise in a category means more children and young people are being recorded with that need as their primary need. It does not by itself show that the underlying prevalence in the population rose by the same amount.
Association, not cause
These are associations. SEND intersects with disadvantage, health and school factors, and the data here do not isolate cause.
How local authorities differ
Across 149 local authorities, the share of new plans issued within 20 weeks ranged from 5% to 100%, with a median of 56.6%.
Authorities are ranked on measures the Department for Education publishes as percentages, because a plan count mostly reflects how large an authority is — the biggest counties top a count ranking whatever they do. Counts are shown alongside, labelled as counts.
Every authority the release publishes a timeliness figure for, grouped into ten-point bands. Read a single authority against this spread rather than against the top of a list.
Horizontal axis: share of new plans issued within 20 weeks, in ten-point bands. Vertical: number of local authorities. The amber band contains Hampshire, at 52%.
View as table
| Within 20 weeks | Local authorities |
|---|---|
| 0–10% | 11 |
| 10–20% | 9 |
| 20–30% | 22 |
| 30–40% | 15 |
| 40–50% | 9 |
| 50–60% | 16 |
| 60–70% | 11 |
| 70–80% | 14 |
| 80–90% | 17 |
| 90–100% | 25 |
What a fast or slow figure does and does not mean
A fast authority is not necessarily a good one and a slow one is not necessarily bad. Timeliness measures how long a decision took, not whether it was right, and the share of requests agreed measures a decision rate, not whether the decisions were correct. Neither figure captures the quality of an assessment or of the provision that followed.
Plan counts are the 2025/26 academic-year census. Timeliness and request decisions are for calendar year 2025. The two are published on different reference periods and are shown as such rather than being presented as one date.
| Local authority | Region | Plans (count) | Within 20 weeks | Requests agreed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kent | South East | 21,742 | 56.9% | 49.1% |
| Hampshire | South East | 20,499 | 52% | 78.8% |
| Surrey | South East | 17,765 | 89.5% | 82% |
| Essex | East of England | 15,776 | 20.1% | 70% |
| Hertfordshire | East of England | 15,137 | 60.3% | 69.6% |
| Lancashire | North West | 14,728 | 9.6% | 74.2% |
| Norfolk | East of England | 13,777 | — | 85% |
| Birmingham | West Midlands | 13,221 | 37.1% | 68.9% |
| Suffolk | East of England | 11,598 | 16.5% | 80.6% |
| West Sussex | South East | 10,945 | 15.5% | 69.5% |
| Devon | South West | 10,340 | 5.1% | 44.6% |
| Staffordshire | West Midlands | 9,979 | 24.6% | 61.4% |
| Manchester | North West | 9,874 | 74.2% | 75.5% |
| Lincolnshire | East Midlands | 9,381 | 86.8% | 60.3% |
| Derbyshire | East Midlands | 9,022 | 5% | 48.8% |
| Leicestershire | East Midlands | 8,812 | 20.3% | 71% |
| Cambridgeshire | East of England | 8,619 | 7.3% | 92.4% |
| Oxfordshire | South East | 8,559 | 37.8% | 78.1% |
| Bradford | Yorkshire and The Humber | 8,489 | 86.5% | 72.5% |
| Worcestershire | West Midlands | 8,276 | 66.1% | 83.9% |
| Warwickshire | West Midlands | 8,227 | 22.8% | 75.1% |
| Liverpool | North West | 7,875 | 97.3% | 63.2% |
| Buckinghamshire | South East | 7,629 | 7.8% | 81% |
| Gloucestershire | South West | 7,521 | 27.4% | 63.4% |
| Leeds | Yorkshire and The Humber | 7,474 | 7.3% | 88.7% |
| Sheffield | Yorkshire and The Humber | 7,019 | 27.8% | 89.8% |
| Wiltshire | South West | 6,914 | 61.6% | 70.3% |
| Wirral | North West | 6,480 | 8.2% | 79% |
| North Yorkshire | Yorkshire and The Humber | 6,444 | 75.7% | 83.8% |
| Somerset | South West | 6,350 | 6.4% | 67.4% |
| Nottinghamshire | East Midlands | 6,265 | 32.3% | 69.9% |
| Croydon | London | 5,926 | 61.2% | 84.8% |
| County Durham | North East | 5,776 | 77.6% | 61.7% |
| Bristol, City of | South West | 5,770 | 6.8% | 82.6% |
| Cornwall | South West | 5,575 | 34.1% | 62.7% |
| Cheshire East | North West | 5,440 | 23.9% | 82.6% |
| North Northamptonshire | East Midlands | 5,372 | 56.5% | 81.7% |
| West Northamptonshire | East Midlands | 5,337 | 7.9% | 57.7% |
| East Sussex | South East | 5,243 | 43.1% | 49.2% |
| Kirklees | Yorkshire and The Humber | 5,092 | 62.8% | 64.3% |
| Enfield | London | 5,055 | 67.2% | 78.3% |
| Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole | South West | 4,982 | 69% | 68.7% |
| Barnet | London | 4,840 | 100% | 68.3% |
| Tower Hamlets | London | 4,834 | 46% | 79.7% |
| Bromley | London | 4,790 | 71.3% | 71.9% |
| Sandwell | West Midlands | 4,780 | 29.8% | 83.5% |
| Walsall | West Midlands | 4,779 | 96.3% | 38.2% |
| Dorset | South West | 4,719 | 78.2% | 81.8% |
| Ealing | London | 4,546 | 52.2% | 84.4% |
| Cheshire West and Chester | North West | 4,395 | 22.1% | 57.6% |
| Central Bedfordshire | East of England | 4,357 | 56.3% | 58.7% |
| Medway | South East | 4,287 | 21.4% | 78.6% |
| Sefton | North West | 4,197 | 42.9% | 78.4% |
| Leicester | East Midlands | 4,175 | — | 100% |
| Brent | London | 4,171 | 69.7% | 70.9% |
| Wakefield | Yorkshire and The Humber | 4,167 | 80.2% | 52.8% |
| Northumberland | North East | 4,163 | 81.4% | 62% |
| Dudley | West Midlands | 4,151 | 25.1% | 75.3% |
| Wigan | North West | 4,062 | 21.9% | 71.9% |
| Rotherham | Yorkshire and The Humber | 4,062 | 79.4% | 73.8% |
| Oldham | North West | 3,959 | 76.9% | 68.1% |
| Waltham Forest | London | 3,946 | 25.7% | 100% |
| Stockport | North West | 3,930 | 18.1% | 64.8% |
| Kingston upon Hull, City of | Yorkshire and The Humber | 3,919 | 37.4% | 61.1% |
| East Riding of Yorkshire | Yorkshire and The Humber | 3,917 | 92.9% | 57.2% |
| Coventry | West Midlands | 3,914 | 37.6% | 66.4% |
| Bolton | North West | 3,909 | 86% | 68.3% |
| Tameside | North West | 3,837 | 30.3% | 68.8% |
| Redbridge | London | 3,830 | 27.9% | 80.1% |
| Rochdale | North West | 3,807 | 49.3% | 75.4% |
| Hillingdon | London | 3,735 | 77.6% | 63.6% |
| Derby | East Midlands | 3,734 | 52.6% | 55.2% |
| Salford | North West | 3,727 | 54.9% | 67.2% |
| Hackney | London | 3,721 | 32.8% | 55.1% |
| Stoke-on-Trent | West Midlands | 3,707 | 58.7% | 69.7% |
| Lewisham | London | 3,698 | 22.9% | 72.4% |
| South Gloucestershire | South West | 3,669 | 56.6% | 54.9% |
| Plymouth | South West | 3,646 | 10.2% | 70.1% |
| Newham | London | 3,639 | 31.5% | 75.5% |
| Greenwich | London | 3,626 | 31.2% | 85.4% |
| Southwark | London | 3,619 | 42.8% | 56.3% |
| Bexley | London | 3,540 | 65.9% | 65.7% |
| Hounslow | London | 3,499 | 58.4% | 67.7% |
| Newcastle upon Tyne | North East | 3,496 | 21.8% | 78.8% |
| Havering | London | 3,419 | 32% | 76.6% |
| Trafford | North West | 3,405 | 47.4% | 81.4% |
| Barnsley | Yorkshire and The Humber | 3,380 | 98.6% | 67.6% |
| Shropshire | West Midlands | 3,360 | 11.9% | 78.9% |
| Wandsworth | London | 3,359 | 100% | 75.6% |
| Lambeth | London | 3,350 | 89.1% | 63.6% |
| Doncaster | Yorkshire and The Humber | 3,336 | 83.9% | 52.1% |
| Wolverhampton | West Midlands | 3,324 | 19.6% | 93.6% |
| Barking and Dagenham | London | 3,297 | 27.2% | 81.1% |
| Milton Keynes | South East | 3,202 | 11.5% | 100% |
| Brighton and Hove | South East | 3,193 | 57.4% | 64.9% |
| Sunderland | North East | 3,191 | 59.4% | 36.5% |
| Peterborough | East of England | 3,191 | 66% | 80.1% |
| Knowsley | North West | 3,172 | 86.4% | 67.1% |
| Bury | North West | 3,099 | 98.1% | 65.6% |
| Cumberland | North West | 3,088 | 6.7% | 61.3% |
| Haringey | London | 3,048 | 89.6% | 69.6% |
| Luton | East of England | 3,037 | 29.1% | 73.7% |
| Harrow | London | 3,019 | 88.2% | 78.4% |
| North Somerset | South West | 3,007 | 96% | 56.2% |
| Southampton | South East | 2,945 | 80% | 91.7% |
| Calderdale | Yorkshire and The Humber | 2,934 | 94.1% | 86% |
| Thurrock | East of England | 2,934 | 35.4% | 66.1% |
| Merton | London | 2,917 | 95.6% | 74.8% |
| Solihull | West Midlands | 2,806 | 74% | 57.5% |
| Stockton-on-Tees | North East | 2,800 | 52.9% | 84.2% |
| Swindon | South West | 2,789 | 11.8% | 66.3% |
| Sutton | London | 2,708 | 96% | 51.8% |
| Westmorland and Furness | North West | 2,687 | 72% | 74.2% |
| Bath and North East Somerset | South West | 2,687 | 33.2% | 78.1% |
| Telford and Wrekin | West Midlands | 2,669 | 97.3% | 66.7% |
| St. Helens | North West | 2,644 | 59.6% | 76.4% |
| Portsmouth | South East | 2,616 | 42.9% | 81.3% |
| North Tyneside | North East | 2,590 | 26% | 83.5% |
| Slough | South East | 2,585 | 30.5% | 76% |
| Warrington | North West | 2,494 | 73.6% | 65.7% |
| Wokingham | South East | 2,435 | 43% | 60.9% |
| Southend-on-Sea | East of England | 2,432 | 47% | 76.3% |
| Islington | London | 2,334 | 85.8% | 76.1% |
| Bedford | East of England | 2,319 | 94.3% | 55.4% |
| Nottingham | East Midlands | 2,311 | 30.2% | 88% |
| North East Lincolnshire | Yorkshire and The Humber | 2,261 | 98.6% | 85.6% |
| Richmond upon Thames | London | 2,166 | 96.5% | 75.1% |
| Kingston upon Thames | London | 2,159 | 97.2% | 74.2% |
| Middlesbrough | North East | 2,133 | 93.3% | 71.3% |
| Reading | South East | 2,077 | 62.5% | 76.7% |
| Herefordshire, County of | West Midlands | 2,048 | 57% | 74% |
| Gateshead | North East | 2,046 | 83.7% | 38.7% |
| North Lincolnshire | Yorkshire and The Humber | 1,941 | 70.4% | 80.8% |
| Blackpool | North West | 1,904 | 55% | 67.6% |
| West Berkshire | South East | 1,884 | 25.2% | 97.3% |
| South Tyneside | North East | 1,861 | 92% | 56.8% |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | London | 1,843 | 87.2% | 77.5% |
| Halton | North West | 1,825 | — | 59.8% |
| Torbay | South West | 1,793 | 27.1% | 76.1% |
| York | Yorkshire and The Humber | 1,777 | 98.5% | 75.3% |
| Blackburn with Darwen | North West | 1,739 | 79.9% | 82.2% |
| Bracknell Forest | South East | 1,718 | 100% | 37.6% |
| Camden | London | 1,645 | 73% | 83.2% |
| Redcar and Cleveland | North East | 1,565 | 19.9% | 80.6% |
| Westminster | London | 1,527 | 92.9% | 84.1% |
| Windsor and Maidenhead | South East | 1,363 | 100% | 54.5% |
| Darlington | North East | 1,227 | 81.5% | 61.5% |
| Hartlepool | North East | 1,067 | 21.4% | 64.3% |
| Kensington and Chelsea | London | 880 | 97.9% | 82.6% |
| Rutland | East Midlands | 431 | 80.7% | 92.2% |
| City of London | London | 26 | 100% | 80% |
| Isles of Scilly | South West | 15 | 100% | 60% |
Sorted by plan count, which is a size measure rather than a ranking. Use the percentage columns to compare authorities. A dash means the release does not publish the figure for that authority.
Hampshire
Hampshire held 20,499 plans and issued 52% of new plans within 20 weeks, agreeing to assess 78.8% of the requests it received.
Hampshire in full →The 152 authorities in this table hold 716,838 plans between them, against a national total of 718,838. The difference of 2,000 is plans the release does not attribute to a named authority. It is stated rather than absorbed into the table.
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: DfE, Education, health and care plans, England (January 2026).
What is changing, and what has actually changed
This tracker records status, not merit. It does not say whether any proposal is a good idea — that is a political question — only whether it is a proposal, a bill, or the law. The distinction matters because a family reading about a change will want to know whether it applies to them yet, and for everything below except the 2014 Act, it does not.
- In forceIn force since September 2014
EHC plans and the 0–25 framework
Part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 is the law currently in force. Everything described elsewhere on this page — the duty to secure provision, the 20-week limit, the right of appeal — comes from it and is unchanged.
Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3 ↗ - Proposal onlyPublished 23 February 2026
Schools white paper: Every child achieving and thriving
Published on 23 February 2026, setting out the government’s intended direction for SEND. A white paper is a statement of policy intention. It changes nothing on its own, and none of what follows below has taken legal effect.
DfE, Every child achieving and thriving ↗ - Proposal onlyProposed February 2026
Individual support plans for every child with SEND in school
The white paper proposes a new legal requirement on schools to produce an individual support plan for every child with SEND, drawn up by teachers and specialists rather than by the local authority. This would be a new duty and would require legislation.
DfE, Every child achieving and thriving ↗ - Proposal onlyStated February 2026
EHC plans retained, with transition from 2030
The government has stated that EHC plans are retained and that existing plans and protections remain in place until at least September 2030; that transition from a mainstream EHC plan to an individual support plan would begin only in 2030; that children in year 3 or older would not transition until the end of secondary school; and that a child holding a special-school place in 2029 could keep it until they finish education. These are stated commitments in a policy document, not statutory guarantees.
DfE, Radical expansion in rights for children with SEND ↗ - Announced, not introducedAnnounced in the 2026 King’s Speech
Education for All Bill
The bill announced to legislate the white paper. Checked against the UK Parliament Bills API on the verification date: no bill of this title appears among the current session’s bills, so it has been announced but not introduced. Until it is introduced, passed and brought into force, none of the proposals above is law.
UK Parliament, Bills before Parliament ↗ - Proposal onlyAnnounced February 2026
Funding announced alongside the white paper
The government announced an inclusion grant of £1.6 billion over three years from 2026/27, £3.7 billion for more than 60,000 specialist places, £1.8 billion for an "Experts at Hand" programme, and £200 million for teacher training. Announced spending is not the same as spending that has occurred, and these figures are recorded here as announcements.
DfE, Radical expansion in rights for children with SEND ↗
Parliamentary status checked against the UK Parliament Bills API on 2026-08-16. This tracker is refreshed when the underlying status changes, not on a schedule.
View as table
| Item | Status | Stated |
|---|---|---|
| EHC plans and the 0–25 framework | In force | In force since September 2014 |
| Schools white paper: Every child achieving and thriving | Proposal only | Published 23 February 2026 |
| Individual support plans for every child with SEND in school | Proposal only | Proposed February 2026 |
| EHC plans retained, with transition from 2030 | Proposal only | Stated February 2026 |
| Education for All Bill | Announced, not introduced | Announced in the 2026 King’s Speech |
| Funding announced alongside the white paper | Proposal only | Announced February 2026 |
Every statistic elsewhere on this page describes the system as it currently operates under the 2014 Act. None of it has been adjusted for the proposals above, because none of them has taken effect.
Attainment
A different population from everything above
Key stage 2 and key stage 4 pupils in state-funded schools in England. This is a school-pupil population. It is NOT the 0–25 EHC-plan population used elsewhere in this chapter, and the two must never be divided by one another.
At key stage 4 in 2024/25, average Attainment 8 was 14.8 for pupils with an EHC plan, 33.8 for pupils on SEN support, and 50.2 for pupils with no identified SEN.
Attainment 8 measures achievement across eight qualifications. The maximum is 90.
- No identified SEN (507,595 pupils)50.2
- SEN support (82,294 pupils)33.8
- EHC plan (34,297 pupils)14.8
These groups are not comparable populations
These groups are not comparable populations. A child has an EHC plan because an assessment concluded they need provision beyond what a school ordinarily provides — the group is defined by the presence of need. The gap between the groups therefore describes the groups, and says nothing about whether the support worked. No published dataset supports reading it either way, and this page does not.
Source: DfE, Key stage 4 performance. State-funded schools, England.
View as table
| Group | Pupils | Average Attainment 8 score, key stage 4, 2024/25 |
|---|---|---|
| No identified SEN | 507,595 | 50.2 |
| SEN support | 82,294 | 33.8 |
| EHC plan | 34,297 | 14.8 |
The share of eligible pupils reaching the expected standard in all three subjects.
- No identified SEN (502,060 pupils)74%
- SEN support (109,208 pupils)29%
- EHC plan (37,161 pupils)9%
These groups are not comparable populations
These groups are not comparable populations. A child has an EHC plan because an assessment concluded they need provision beyond what a school ordinarily provides — the group is defined by the presence of need. The gap between the groups therefore describes the groups, and says nothing about whether the support worked. No published dataset supports reading it either way, and this page does not.
Source: DfE, Key stage 2 attainment. State-funded schools, England.
View as table
| Group | Pupils | Meeting the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, key stage 2, 2024/25 |
|---|---|---|
| No identified SEN | 502,060 | 74% |
| SEN support | 109,208 | 29% |
| EHC plan | 37,161 | 9% |
At key stage 2 in 2024/25, 9% of pupils with an EHC plan met the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, against 29% on SEN support and 74% with no identified SEN.
The key stage 4 breakdown by SEN provision begins in 2018/19; earlier years are published without it. Key stage 2 assessments were cancelled in 2019/20 and 2020/21, so those years are absent from the series rather than estimated.
Association, not cause
These are associations. SEND intersects with disadvantage, health and school factors, and the data here do not isolate cause.
What is established, and what is argued
Levels 1 and 2 are what the published data shows. Levels 3 and 4 are questions people argue about, sorted by whether the data could in principle settle them. Putting them in the same list, clearly separated, is the honest alternative to either asserting an explanation or leaving the questions out.
- Level 1 — Directly published
The number of children and young people with an EHC plan has risen every year in the published series, and so has the number of requests for assessment.
Directly published by DfE in the EHC-plan release. Nothing is inferred.
- Level 1 — Directly published
High needs funding allocated through the national funding formula has risen every year in the published series.
Directly published by DfE in each year’s high needs NFF table.
- Level 1 — Directly published
Appeals to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) have risen substantially over the published series.
Directly published by the Ministry of Justice in Tribunals statistics quarterly.
- Level 2 — Association in the data
Pupils with an EHC plan attain markedly lower average scores at key stage 2 and key stage 4 than pupils with no identified SEN.
An association between two published measures. It is not a causal finding, and the groups differ by construction — see the note on selection.
- Level 3 — Competing explanations
Why the number of plans is rising.
Rising underlying need, improved identification, changed thresholds, population growth, and families seeking a plan because SEN Support did not deliver are all offered as explanations, including by government and by the sector. The published statistics count plans and requests; they do not separate these, and no figure on this site adjudicates between them.
- Level 3 — Competing explanations
Why appeals are rising, and why so many are lodged relative to plans issued.
This could reflect more decisions being made, more decisions being contested, better awareness of the right of appeal, or worse decisions. The tribunal statistics record volumes, not the reason a case was brought.
- Level 4 — Not answerable from this data
Whether the provision specified in plans is actually delivered.
No national dataset records delivery. The statistics record that plans exist and what is written in them.
- Level 4 — Not answerable from this data
Whether a child would have done better with different support.
This requires a counterfactual that no observational dataset contains. It is not a gap in the statistics; it is outside what they can answer.
The money
High needs funding allocated through the national funding formula rose from £6.18bn in 2019-20 to £11.45bn in 2025-26, an increase of 85% in cash terms.
These are allocations — money distributed to local authorities through the high needs national funding formula. They are not spending, and not outturn. What an authority actually spent, and whether it overspent, is reported separately in its section 251 return.
Source: DfE, National funding formula tables for schools and high needs, each year's own table.
View as table
| Period | High needs budget allocated through the national funding formula |
|---|---|
| 2019-20 | £6.2bn |
| 2020-21 | £7.2bn |
| 2021-22 | £8.1bn |
| 2022-23 | £8.9bn |
| 2023-24 | £9.7bn |
| 2024-25 | £10.5bn |
| 2025-26 | £11.4bn |
Cash, not real terms
These are cash figures as published. They are not adjusted for inflation, and this page does not adjust them, because the deflator choice would be a UK Facts judgement rather than a published one. Over this period general prices rose substantially, so the real-terms increase is smaller than the cash increase. Read the cash series as what was allocated, not as what it bought.
Allocated is not spent
An allocation is money distributed to local authorities. It is not spending, and it is not the same as whether an authority’s high needs budget balanced. Many authorities have carried deficits on the high needs block; that is reported in their own section 251 returns and audited accounts, not in the allocation tables used here, so no deficit figure appears on this page.
The ten largest allocations, 2025-26
These are the largest allocations, which is largely a measure of how large an authority is. They are shown as amounts, not as a ranking of anything.
View as table
| Local authority | Region | Allocation |
|---|---|---|
| Kent | South East | £344.4m |
| Birmingham | West Midlands | £306.4m |
| Essex | East Of England | £259.6m |
| Surrey | South East | £239.1m |
| Hampshire | South East | £222.4m |
| Lancashire | North West | £218.1m |
| Hertfordshire | East Of England | £205.7m |
| Norfolk | East Of England | £152.7m |
| Leeds | Yorkshire And The Humber | £148.3m |
| ESFA | Esfa | £145.7m |
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: DfE, National funding formula tables for schools and high needs.
Appeals
Appeals lodged with the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) rose from 3,397 in 2009/10 to 29,446 in 2025/26 — 8.7 times as many.
An appeal is not a child
An appeal is not a child, and appeals cannot be compared with plans to produce an appeal rate: the two are published on different reference periods, cover different populations, and one child may bring more than one appeal. The count below is of appeals lodged.
Financial years with all four quarters published. The right of appeal attaches to specific decisions — a refusal to assess, a refusal to issue a plan, the content of a plan, or a decision to cease one.
Dark bars: the first measure. Grey bars: appeals disposed of.
Source: Ministry of Justice, Tribunals statistics quarterly.
View as table
| Period | Appeals lodged with the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) | appeals disposed of |
|---|---|---|
| 2009/10 | 3,397 | 2,879 |
| 2010/11 | 3,384 | 2,948 |
| 2011/12 | 3,530 | 3,756 |
| 2012/13 | 3,544 | 3,557 |
| 2013/14 | 4,155 | 3,615 |
| 2014/15 | 3,734 | 3,631 |
| 2015/16 | 3,236 | 3,141 |
| 2016/17 | 4,277 | 3,721 |
| 2017/18 | 5,039 | 4,337 |
| 2018/19 | 6,374 | 4,511 |
| 2019/20 | 7,694 | 7,090 |
| 2020/21 | 8,130 | 7,871 |
| 2021/22 | 10,094 | 8,924 |
| 2022/23 | 13,360 | 10,941 |
| 2023/24 | 17,559 | 14,495 |
| 2024/25 | 23,861 | 19,464 |
| 2025/26 | 29,446 | 22,874 |
How appeals were decided is not published here
This release publishes appeals received and appeals disposed of. It does not publish how they were decided, so no figure for the share of appeals upheld appears on this page.
The First-tier Tribunal (SEND) covers England only, but the Ministry of Justice publishes it within a tribunals series whose coverage is England and Wales. The jurisdiction itself is English.
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: Ministry of Justice, Tribunals statistics quarterly.
Access arrangements in exams
The previous figures were withdrawn by their publisher
On 17 July 2025 Ofqual withdrew its published access-arrangements statistics covering 2014 to 2024.
Ofqual stated that the published figures significantly overstated the number of students receiving access arrangements, because the data counted arrangements for students who did not sit exams that year and counted duplicate applications for the same student more than once.
Revised figures were published in November 2025 and are classified as official statistics in development. They report a lower and an upper bound rather than a single number, because the underlying data cannot distinguish between the two readings.
Ofqual, Ofqual withdraws access arrangements statistics (17 July 2025) ↗In 2024/25, between 345,055 and 534,390 access arrangements were approved for GCSE, AS and A level students in England.
Each bar spans the published lower and upper bound. There is no point estimate because Ofqual does not publish one.
- 2015/16152,385 – 307,080
- 2016/17178,135 – 321,110
- 2017/18209,525 – 351,735
- 2018/19223,005 – 349,570
- 2019/20236,025 – 351,120
- 2020/21210,670 – 309,530
- 2021/22239,720 – 339,110
- 2022/23267,130 – 380,190
- 2023/24302,830 – 430,500
- 2024/25345,055 – 534,390
Both bounds are shown everywhere, and they are never averaged. The midpoint of a published range is a number nobody published, and quoting one here would repeat in miniature the error that caused the original statistics to be withdrawn.
Source: Ofqual, Access arrangements for GCSE, AS and A level: 2024 to 2025 academic year. Official statistics in development.
View as table
| Period | Lower bound | Upper bound |
|---|---|---|
| 2015/16 | 152,385 | 307,080 |
| 2016/17 | 178,135 | 321,110 |
| 2017/18 | 209,525 | 351,735 |
| 2018/19 | 223,005 | 349,570 |
| 2019/20 | 236,025 | 351,120 |
| 2020/21 | 210,670 | 309,530 |
| 2021/22 | 239,720 | 339,110 |
| 2022/23 | 267,130 | 380,190 |
| 2023/24 | 302,830 | 430,500 |
| 2024/25 | 345,055 | 534,390 |
Access arrangements and SEND are not the same thing
GCSE, AS and A level students in England with an approved access arrangement. Not all have SEND, and not all students with SEND have an access arrangement.
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: Ofqual, Access arrangements for GCSE, AS and A level: 2024 to 2025 academic year.
The people
The Children and Families Act requires a local authority carrying out an EHC needs assessment to seek psychological advice. This workforce is therefore part of the statutory process, not a general staffing statistic. These figures count psychologists employed centrally by local authorities; those working privately or through other arrangements are not in this count, so it is not the whole profession.
Full-time equivalent and headcount are both shown because they move differently. A headcount rising faster than FTE means more people each working fewer hours, which is a different thing from more capacity.
Dark bars: the first measure. Grey bars: headcount.
Source: DfE, School workforce in England. Full-time equivalent shown dark, headcount grey.
View as table
| Period | Educational psychologists employed by local authorities | headcount |
|---|---|---|
| 2010/11 | 1,724 | 1,895 |
| 2011/12 | 1,434 | 1,728 |
| 2012/13 | 1,463 | 1,721 |
| 2013/14 | 1,594 | 1,721 |
| 2014/15 | 1,362 | 1,633 |
| 2015/16 | 1,404 | 1,741 |
| 2016/17 | 1,368 | 1,617 |
| 2017/18 | 1,206 | 1,478 |
| 2018/19 | 1,655 | 2,145 |
| 2019/20 | 1,694 | 2,013 |
| 2020/21 | 1,699 | 2,047 |
| 2021/22 | 1,817 | 2,162 |
| 2022/23 | 1,939 | 2,325 |
| 2023/24 | 2,102 | 2,546 |
| 2024/25 | 2,192 | 2,726 |
| 2025/26 | 2,332 | 3,023 |
Two series near each other is not a finding
The number of educational psychologists and the number of EHC plans are two separate published series covering different things. Placing them near each other invites a conclusion neither dataset supports: nothing here shows that assessment capacity caused any change in timeliness, or that it did not. The two are shown because both are part of the statutory process, not because the data links them.
2,332
Educational psychologists (FTE)
2025/26, up from 1,724 in 2010/11
3,023
Educational psychologists (headcount)
More people, fewer hours each than the FTE implies
295,183
Teaching assistants (FTE)
2025/26, state-funded schools
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: DfE, School workforce in England.
The other three nations
Education is devolved. Every figure on this page is England only. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland operate different frameworks with different legal definitions, and their figures are not directly comparable.
Registered break — Wales
- 2021 to 2025 — Legal and definitional (Wales). Wales replaced the SEN framework — School Action, School Action Plus and statements — with the Additional Learning Needs framework and individual development plans under the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018, phased in from 2021. The Welsh Government states that from September 2025 the ALN system is the sole system for supporting children and young people with ALN in Wales. Across the transition the recorded count falls from 105,575 pupils (22.6%) in 2016/17 to 39,850 (8.8%) in 2025/26. That is a change in what is counted and on what basis, not a fall in need of that size, and pre-reform SEN categories are not equivalent to post-reform IDPs. source ↗
These figures do not compare
These are four different legal frameworks producing four different statistics. They are placed side by side so a reader can see what each nation measures, NOT so the numbers can be compared. Scotland's Additional Support Needs is a far broader category than an English EHC plan; Northern Ireland's statement is closer to an EHC plan but covers school pupils only. There is no common measure across the four nations, and this site does not construct one.
England
Children and young people with an Education, Health and Care plan
718,8382025/26
- Population:
- 0 to 25
- Framework:
- Children and Families Act 2014
Scotland
Pupils recorded as having Additional Support Needs
299,4452025
43.0% of the school roll
- Population:
- School pupils
- Framework:
- Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004
Northern Ireland
Pupils with a statement of Special Educational Needs (Stage 3)
30,6492025/26
69,186 at Stages 1 to 3
- Population:
- School pupils
- Framework:
- Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, as amended
Wales
Pupils recorded with Additional Learning Needs or special educational needs
39,8502025/26
8.8% of pupils · 39,535 hold an individual development plan · 315 transferred to the ALN system and awaiting a decision
Framework change: Wales is part-way through replacing one legal framework with another, and the count reflects that. In 2003/04 the figure counted School Action, School Action Plus and statements. In 2025/26 it counts individual development plans under the Additional Learning Needs framework, and no pupil remains recorded under the old categories. The fall across the series is a change in what is counted, not a fall in need of that size.
- Population:
- School pupils in maintained schools
- Framework:
- Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: Scottish Government, NI Department of Education, DfE.
What the published data cannot tell you
These are not gaps waiting to be filled from another source. They are questions the national statistics are not built to answer, and a number that appeared to answer one of them would be wrong.
Whether need is rising
The statistics count plans, requests and recorded needs — that is, they count the system’s activity. A rise in plans is consistent with rising underlying need, with better identification, with changed thresholds, with population growth, or with any combination. The published data does not separate them, and no figure on this page should be read as a measure of prevalence.
Whether a child is getting the provision in their plan
There is no national dataset of whether specified provision is actually delivered. The statistics record that plans exist and what is written in them, not what happens in classrooms.
Whether outcomes are better with a plan than without
Children with plans differ systematically from children without them — that is the point of the assessment. Comparing their outcomes measures the difference between the groups, not the effect of the plan. No published source supports a causal reading, and this page does not offer one.
How local authorities compare on quality
Local figures show volumes and timeliness. They do not show quality of assessment, appropriateness of provision, or whether a refusal was right. A fast authority is not necessarily a good one, and a slow one is not necessarily a bad one.
How England compares with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Education is devolved and the four nations use different legal frameworks and different definitions. There is no common measure to compare, so this chapter does not construct one.
Where every statement on this page comes from
Everything on this page comes from a published source that is linked: primary legislation, the statutory Code of Practice, Department for Education statistical releases, and parliamentary papers. Nothing is drawn from professional or sector experience. Where the published record does not answer a question, this page says the data does not answer it rather than filling the gap.
Method
Every figure is computed, none is typed in
Each statistic on this page is generated at build time from the Department for Education’s published dataset, through a claims layer that records the inputs, the calculation, the population and the date verified. The full list is below, so any number here can be checked against the source without taking this page’s word for it.
View as table
| Claim | Statement | Calculation | Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| ehcp-total-latest | 718,838 children and young people had an EHC plan in 2025/26, 12.5% more than the year before. | change = (latest − previous) / previous × 100 | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-growth-since-first | The number of EHC plans has risen 103% since 2018/19, from 353,995 to 718,838. | (latest − first) / first × 100 over the published series | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-flow-latest | 110,708 new plans started and 50,346 ceased during 2025. | Published calendar-year counts; not differenced against the January stock | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-requests-latest | 162,702 requests for an EHC needs assessment were received in 2025. | Published count | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-timeliness-latest | 46.1% of new plans were issued within the 20-week statutory limit in 2025. | DfE headline measure, excluding cases where a statutory exception applies | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-mainstream-share | 45.5% of children and young people with an EHC plan were in mainstream settings in 2025/26. | mainstream / all plans × 100, using the EHC-plan release’s own placement categories | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ehcp-top-need | The most common primary need recorded was Autistic spectrum disorder, for 226,723 plans in 2025/26. | Largest primary-need category in the published taxonomy | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| la-timeliness-spread | Across 149 local authorities, the share of new plans issued within 20 weeks ranged from 5% to 100%, with a median of 56.6%. | Minimum, maximum and median of the DfE-published per-authority percentage; no denominator is computed here | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| la-hampshire | Hampshire held 20,499 plans and issued 52% of new plans within 20 weeks, agreeing to assess 78.8% of the requests it received. | Published per-authority figures, quoted directly | Ages 0–25, all settings |
| ks4-attainment8-by-sen | At key stage 4 in 2024/25, average Attainment 8 was 14.8 for pupils with an EHC plan, 33.8 for pupils on SEN support, and 50.2 for pupils with no identified SEN. | Published averages, quoted directly. No rate is computed across populations | School pupils |
| ks2-expected-standard-by-sen | At key stage 2 in 2024/25, 9% of pupils with an EHC plan met the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, against 29% on SEN support and 74% with no identified SEN. | Published percentages, quoted directly | School pupils |
| high-needs-funding | High needs funding allocated through the national funding formula rose from £6.18bn in 2019-20 to £11.45bn in 2025-26, an increase of 85% in cash terms. | (latest − first) / first × 100, cash terms, not adjusted for inflation | School pupils |
| tribunal-appeals | Appeals lodged with the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) rose from 3,397 in 2009/10 to 29,446 in 2025/26 — 8.7 times as many. | Sum of the four published quarters in each complete financial year; part-years excluded | School pupils |
| access-arrangements | In 2024/25, between 345,055 and 534,390 access arrangements were approved for GCSE, AS and A level students in England. | Ofqual publishes a lower and an upper bound. Both are carried; they are never averaged | School pupils |
The population rule, enforced by the build
Covers all children and young people aged 0 to 25 with an EHC plan, including those in early years settings, further education, and those educated elsewhere. This is NOT a school-pupil population and must never be used as a numerator or denominator against school-census SEN figures.
This is the most common error in published SEND statistics, so it is enforced mechanically rather than by care: every series carries its population, and the build fails if a rate is computed with an all-age numerator over a school-pupil denominator.
Breaks in the series
Definitional and legal changes are held in a register, and the charts read it and draw the markers themselves. A registered break therefore cannot be missing from a chart that crosses it. Two are registered: the 2014 replacement of statements by EHC plans, and the 2015 merger of School Action and School Action Plus into SEN Support.
A declared interest
The owner of this site works in SEND provision. That is disclosed because it is the kind of thing a reader is entitled to know, and it is the reason the sourcing rule on this page is stricter than elsewhere on the site: everything on this page comes from a published source that is linked: primary legislation, the statutory Code of Practice, Department for Education statistical releases, and parliamentary papers. Nothing is drawn from professional or sector experience. Where the published record does not answer a question, this page says the data does not answer it rather than filling the gap.
Last verified 2026-08-16. Data: DfE, Education, health and care plans, England (January 2026).
Related sections
- In this sectionEducationThe other nine chapters, and how this section is built.
- Leaves this sectionPublic financesWhere education spending sits in total government spending.
- Leaves this sectionHampshireLocal-authority figures, including the local SEND caseload.
- Leaves this sectionHow votes become seatsThe same computed-claims method applied to elections.
Scope and definitions
England, not the UK
Education is devolved. Every figure on this page is England only. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland operate different frameworks with different legal definitions, and their figures are not directly comparable.
Ages 0 to 25, not school pupils
Covers all children and young people aged 0 to 25 with an EHC plan, including those in early years settings, further education, and those educated elsewhere. This is NOT a school-pupil population and must never be used as a numerator or denominator against school-census SEN figures.