One of the most significant proposals within the Government’s SEND reforms is the introduction of Individual Support Plans (ISPs). Under the proposals, ISPs would become a legal entitlement for children and young people with SEND, creating a digital record of a child’s needs, the support they should receive and the professionals responsible for delivering that support. The intention is to provide a clearer and more consistent approach to identifying, planning and monitoring support, whilst also helping families navigate a system that can often feel fragmented and difficult to understand.
As a former teacher and SENDCo, and through my current work, I can see considerable potential within the proposal. However, as with any large-scale reform, the success of Individual Support Plans will ultimately depend less on the policy itself and more on how it is implemented in practice. The principle is difficult to argue with. Most professionals would agree that families benefit from clarity, that support should follow a child through their education and that provision should be planned in a more consistent way across the country. The challenge lies in ensuring that these plans genuinely improve support rather than becoming another administrative process within an already stretched system.
Building on Existing Practice
Although ISPs are detailed in the proposed reforms, the underlying concept is unlikely to feel unfamiliar to most schools. Across the country, settings already use a wide range of documents including pupil passports, learner profiles, SEND support plans and Individual Education Plans. These documents vary considerably in both format and quality, but their purpose is usually similar: to identify a child or young person’s needs and record how those needs will be supported.
Over the years, I have seen some excellent examples of support plans being used effectively. In these schools, staff understand the plans, families contribute to them and they influence classroom practice. The document itself is not viewed as an end point but as a tool that helps educators make informed decisions. Equally, I have seen examples where plans become largely administrative exercises, completed because they are expected rather than because they are actively shaping support. As discussion around Individual Support Plans develops, there is a valuable opportunity to learn from both experiences. Rather than simply creating a new national document, we should be asking what has worked well in existing systems and, just as importantly, what has not.
Greater Transparency for Families
One of the clearest potential benefits of Individual Support Plans is the greater visibility they could provide for families. Parents frequently tell me that they are not always certain what support has been agreed, who is responsible for delivering it or how progress is being reviewed. Even where schools are working exceptionally hard to support children, communication can sometimes feel inconsistent or unclear.
A well-designed ISP could help address some of those concerns by creating a shared record that is accessible, understandable and focused on practical support. Families would have a clearer picture of what should be happening and professionals would have a common framework for discussing needs and provision. This has the potential to strengthen relationships between home and school by creating a greater sense of shared understanding and accountability.
The proposed digital nature of the plans could also improve continuity. Families often describe feeling as though they have to start from the beginning every time their child changes class, moves year groups or transitions to a new setting. Information that is already known and understood can sometimes be lost or diluted as it passes between professionals. If implemented effectively, a digital plan that moves with a child could reduce this repetition and make transitions smoother for both families and educational settings.
Capacity and Workload Considerations
While the possible benefits are significant, I do think it is important to discuss the practical realities of implementation. Around 20% of children and young people are identified as having SEND. If, as is proposed, every one of those pupils becomes entitled to an Individual Support Plan, schools could potentially be responsible for maintaining a substantial number of plans at any one time.
The intention behind the reform is clearly positive. However, creating plans, reviewing them, updating them and engaging with families about them all require time. My concern is not about whether children and young people deserve this level of support planning (they absolutely, absolutely do!) The concern is whether schools will be given the capacity and resources required to make the process meaningful.
Education has seen many examples of initiatives that begin with positive intentions but become diluted because implementation demands exceed available capacity. If ISPs are to succeed, they must remain tools that drive support rather than becoming exercises in compliance. No child has ever benefited from paperwork by itself! Children benefit when information is translated into effective provision, high-quality teaching and meaningful adjustments that remove barriers to learning.
The Role of the SENDCo
Any discussion about Individual Support Plans inevitably leads to a discussion about SENDCos. While I fully support the continued message that SEND is everybody’s responsibility, somebody will still need to oversee systems, ensure consistency, support colleagues and monitor implementation. In many schools, much of that responsibility is likely to sit with the SENDCo.
If every child with SEND has a statutory Individual Support Plan, this could represent a considerable increase in coordination and oversight. For that reason, I believe conversations about ISPs cannot be separated from conversations about SENDCo capacity. If policymakers want these reforms to succeed, they will need to consider how SENDCos can realistically fulfil these responsibilities alongside their existing duties.
In fact, the proposals may prompt a broader debate about SEND leadership itself. The traditional model of one SENDCo per school developed within a different educational landscape. As expectations continue to evolve, we may need to think differently about how SEND leadership is structured and resourced. The system is changing and the leadership structures supporting it may need to change too.
Professional Development Must Sit Alongside Reform
Alongside discussions about systems and processes, there is another factor that will be critical to the success of Individual Support Plans: professional development. One of the aspects of the reforms I most welcome is the Government’s commitment to SEND training for all staff. If we are moving towards a needs-led system where support is not dependent upon diagnosis, it is essential that practitioners feel confident identifying needs and responding appropriately.
Through my work with schools, and through writing SEND Strategies for the Primary Years and SEND Strategies for the Secondary Years, I have spent a great deal of time speaking with teachers about the challenges they face. What they consistently tell me is that they want practical solutions. They want to understand barriers to learning, know which strategies are likely to be effective and feel confident adapting their teaching to meet individual needs.
That is why any future professional development programme must focus not only on understanding SEND but also on implementing support effectively. Staff need the confidence to identify needs, use a graduated approach, select evidence-informed strategies and make appropriate adaptations within their classrooms.
Measuring Success
As discussion around the reforms continues, it is important not to lose sight of the purpose behind them. It can be easy to become absorbed in questions around systems, platforms, documentation and implementation timelines. However, the real measure of success will be whether children and young people experience better outcomes as a result.
If, in a few years’ time, children are receiving support earlier, families feel more informed and involved, staff feel more confident meeting needs and young people feel better understood within their educational settings, then the reforms will have achieved something meaningful.
Individual Support Plans have the potential to contribute to that vision, but their impact will depend on whether they become genuine tools for improving support rather than simply new documents within an already complex system.
