SEND Law Hub
The EHCP is one of the strongest legal protections available. This chapter covers the full process, statutory timescales, what must be in the plan, naming schools, Personal Budgets, annual reviews, and ceasing a plan.
The 'Every Child Achieving and Thriving' Education White Paper was published in February 2026, alongside a companion document 'SEND Reform: Putting Children and Young People First'. These introduce significant proposed changes including Individual Support Plans, a new three-tier support model, and Specialist Provision Packages. The law documented here — the Children and Families Act 2014 and SEND Code of Practice 2015 — remains in full force until legislation and the updated Code are brought into effect. We will update each page as official text is published. See our SEND Reform 2026 page for a full breakdown.
The white paper proposes reserving EHCPs for a Specialist tier of children with the most complex needs, based on nationally defined Specialist Provision Packages. Children with less complex needs would move to Individual Support Plans instead. This is not law yet. Every right, timescale and duty on this page applies in full today. Local authorities cannot apply a new threshold before the law changes. Read the full reform section below.
This is the chapter most families end up relying on. It sets out how to request an EHC needs assessment, the legal timescales, what must be included in the plan, how placements are named, and what your rights are if the local authority refuses, delays or ceases a plan.
Children and Families Act 2014 Section 36. Code of Practice § 9.3 to 9.16
A request can be made by a parent, a young person aged 16 plus, or a school or college. The local authority must decide within 6 weeks whether it will carry out an EHC needs assessment and must give reasons if it refuses. The test is whether the child may have SEN that requires an EHCP.
You can request directly. A diagnosis is not required. School support does not have to have failed for years. If they refuse, you can appeal to the SEND Tribunal.
Submit your request in writing, keep the date, and chase the decision at 6 weeks. Ask for refusal reasons in writing. If the LA uses reform language to justify a refusal, challenge it immediately — cite Section 36 and the current Code of Practice threshold.
SEND Regulations 2014 Regulation 12. Code of Practice § 9.39 to 9.48
The overall process is 20 weeks from request to final plan in most cases. The decision whether to assess is within 6 weeks. A draft plan is typically issued by week 16. Parents and young people must be given at least 15 days to comment on the draft.
Exceptions to the 20 week timescale are limited. Complexity, resource pressures, or a busy EHCP team are not lawful exceptions.
Track the dates like a timeline from day one. Less than 15 days to comment on the draft plan is not lawful. A missed 20 week deadline is a breach you can escalate.
Keep a written timeline. When a deadline slips, write to the local authority and ask for the new date and the lawful reason for the extension. Escalate to the LGO or complaint if delay is causing harm.
Children and Families Act 2014 Section 37. SEND Regulations 2014. Code of Practice § 9.62 to 9.75
EHC plans have mandatory sections including the child or young person's views, needs across education health and care, outcomes, and provision. Special educational provision in Section F must be specific, detailed and quantified. Outcomes in Section E must be clear and measurable.
Every need identified in Section B must be matched by corresponding provision in Section F. Vague or generic wording in Section F is not lawful.
Section F is enforceable. It is the part of the plan you can take to Tribunal and point to when provision is not delivered. Vague Section F wording — "access to support as needed", "regular SALT" without amounts or frequency — is a deliberate tactic to avoid accountability. Challenge it every time.
Cross-check every Section B need against Section F and ask for a written explanation for any gap. If Section F is vague, challenge it at draft stage — it is much harder to fix after the plan is finalised.
Children and Families Act 2014 Sections 38, 39 and 43. Code of Practice § 9.78 to 9.94
Parents and young people can request a particular school or college be named in Section I. The local authority must agree unless: the setting is unsuitable for the child's age, ability, aptitude or SEN; or naming it would be incompatible with the efficient education of others; or the use of public funds would be an inefficient use of resources.
Once a school or college is named in Section I, it must admit the child or young person. A cheaper alternative offered by the LA is not by itself a lawful ground for refusal.
Cost alone is not a lawful reason to refuse your preferred setting. If the LA relies on an exception it must be specific, evidenced, and relate to one of the three statutory grounds. Once named, the school cannot say it cannot meet needs.
Put your preference in writing early in the process. If they refuse, ask for the specific statutory ground they are relying on and the evidence behind it. If it does not hold up, appeal.
Children and Families Act 2014 Section 49. Personal Budget Regulations 2014. Code of Practice § 9.95 to 9.125
Families with an EHC plan, or who are likely to receive one, can request a Personal Budget. Delivery methods include direct payments, third party arrangements, notional budgets, or a combination. The local authority must inform families of their right to request a Personal Budget at the planning stage and at every annual review.
A Personal Budget gives you direct control over how provision is funded and delivered. The LA should tell you this exists — many families are never informed. If refused, they must give written reasons.
Request Personal Budget information and indicative figures during every EHCP process and every annual review. Ask for the decision in writing with reasons.
Children and Families Act 2014 Section 44. Code of Practice § 9.166 to 9.188
EHC plans must be reviewed at least annually. After the review meeting, the local authority must issue a decision within 4 weeks stating whether it will maintain, amend, or cease the plan. From Year 9 onwards, reviews must include preparation for adulthood planning.
Phase transfer deadlines are also fixed. For primary to secondary transition, the amended plan must be issued by 15 February.
The review is your main annual opportunity to update needs, provision and outcomes. Always chase the 4 week post-review decision — it is the starting point for any appeal or amendment dispute.
Request review dates early, submit your written parental contribution before the meeting, and set a reminder for the 4 week decision point. If no decision arrives, chase in writing and escalate if needed.
Children and Families Act 2014 Section 45. Code of Practice § 9.195 to 9.202
A local authority may cease a plan only if it is no longer necessary to make the provision specified. It must consult the child's parents or young person and issue formal written notice. The right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal applies. Cessation without a proper review process is not lawful.
Budget pressure is not a lawful reason to cease a plan. The test is whether the provision is still necessary. If you disagree with a cessation, act fast — the appeal deadline is strict.
If a cease is proposed or issued, request reasons in writing and note the appeal deadline immediately. If reform language is used as justification, challenge it directly in writing. Get support from IPSEA or SOS SEN.
The white paper sets out proposals. The Children and Families Act 2014 and SEND Code of Practice 2015 remain the legal framework until Parliament passes new legislation and a new Code is brought into force. Every timescale, right and duty on this page applies in full today. Local authorities cannot apply a new system before it is enacted.
'Every Child Achieving and Thriving' — DfE, February 2026
The white paper proposes replacing the current binary system — where children either have SEN support or an EHCP — with a three-tier model:
Under this model, EHCPs are reserved for children with the most complex needs. Children currently receiving SEN support without an EHCP would sit in the Targeted or Targeted Plus tier, holding an ISP rather than an EHCP. The ISP would document provision — but without the statutory enforcement weight of an EHCP Section F.
The threshold for an EHCP will be redefined around Specialist Provision Packages. A child who currently has an EHCP that is largely school-based provision may not meet the Specialist threshold under the new system. Children with the most complex needs — those who need specialist placements, intensive multiagency support, or nationally defined SPP provision — should still qualify.
Families with children currently on SEN support should not assume they will receive an EHCP under the new system. Under the proposals, those children will hold ISPs. The question of whether ISPs will carry the same enforcement weight as current EHCPs is still to be determined by the legislation.
For families whose children already have EHCPs, the transition to the new system is not yet defined. There will be consultation. Watch for the formal consultation on the updated SEND Code of Practice.
Specialist Provision Packages (SPPs) will be nationally defined, evidence-based descriptions of support for children with the most complex needs. They will form the framework for future EHCPs at the Specialist tier, replacing the current open-ended and variable Section F drafting with a nationally consistent structure.
SPPs are not yet defined or published. Until they are, Section F must still be written specifically, quantifiably and in detail as required under current law. A vague Section F is unlawful now — do not accept it and do not wait for SPPs to justify pushing back.
The SEND Code of Practice 2015 is being updated. Until the new Code is published and brought into force, every paragraph of the 2015 Code remains statutory guidance that all bodies — local authorities, schools, health, social care — must have regard to. The current four areas of need, the 20-week timescales, the Section F specificity requirements — all of it applies now.
Local authorities may attempt to apply the new tiered approach before it is law — using language about Targeted support or Specialist thresholds to refuse assessment requests or cease existing plans. This is unlawful. The Section 36 assessment threshold is unchanged. The Section 45 cease test is unchanged.
If a local authority uses reform language to justify a refusal or cessation, challenge it in writing immediately. The new system cannot be applied before it is enacted. Reference Section 36 of the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEND Code of Practice 2015 threshold in your challenge.
