To ask you to explain SEND funding and bankrupt councils to me?

[Myanna]

I've read a few articles like this one:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/feb/05/send-costs-bankrupt-english-local-authorities

But I don't understand why the cost of funding SEND is so high that it's going to potentially/actually make most councils insolvent.

It's not like provision is generous or easy to get, from what I've read (I don't have a child who is supported).

Were these kids previously just not supported in any way by the state and was it left to families to cope as best they could?
Are these kids who previously wouldn't have survived, but now do because of better medical care and therefore need a lot of help?
Is this private equity running enterprises and charging huge amounts to local authorities?
Is it just inflation and the cost of employing people?

I really don't know much about this at all but I'm sure many on here do, so I'd really welcome your knowledge.

The parent would need to claim benefits to support their family if they cannot work, that would cost more than £15,000 p/a. But we are not just talking about teachers here. Many SEN parents earn way more than a teacher salary and taking 14 years out of their role will permanently impact that.

I don’t think parents should ever be put in a position where they’re obliged to give up work due to having a child with SEN. I think the ripple effect would be financially disastrous and their MH would very likely suffer

@batt3nb3rg

You clearly have never raised, or potentially encountered, a SENd child.

The increase in parents begging for either respite or residential would be absolutely astronomical if they were forced to withdraw their children from school and self educate/care.

Those children would be unnecessarily forced into residential placements when their parents inevitably burned out, and regardless of that - we don’t have the infrastructure or facilities to accommodate such a huge increase.

I am a qualified teacher, with a SENd education background, and whilst I would hope that our son benefits from that, I’m not an OT. Or a SALT. I’m not a teacher and a 1:1, because I’m not 2 people. We don’t have a hydro pool, or rebound therapy available in the kitchen, there is no soft play sensory area in my garden.

Our son goes to school to learn and develop in ways that we can’t give him. He accesses resources that we don’t have. We use that time to work, and pay inordinate amounts of tax on that. Others get the respite they need, or catch up on the tasks they need to, or attend the many (many) meetings that are necessary. All while their child is cared for by someone else, who is qualified to do so.

Taking that away would in the long run cost the country a fortune, and would seriously impact the wellbeing of those children and their families.

I lost my job due to my son’s disastrous attempts at mainstream. I was a teacher of over 15 years experience but a part time timetable of 30 minutes a day, funnily enough wasn’t compatible with teaching. Then another year of unpredictable attendance, never full time, regularly less than 30 minutes and multiple suspensions. I still can’t work meaningfully, I’ve done some zero hours work but I need to be available for school runs/holidays/appointments (CAMHs are notorious for texting with next day appointments) and no access to any childcare for a high needs child. My son can be physically aggressive when dysregulated. At school that’s handled by trained staff who restrain and can hand off. I will be beaten black and blue if you take him out of education, you will take away his chance of a future. He is emotionally regulating better than he ever has before but he needs time, he is aged 8 but emotionally 2. He will have a future with an education and will be employable but he needs more time and more support to get there.

I was never meant to be at home, I need to work for my own wellbeing but I can’t. The village disappears when you have a child like mine. My mental health is destroyed, I cannot bear the thought of waking up to be at home again but I have to. This is the reality of what some people on this thread are suggesting. It disproportionally affects women.

I have said repeatedly on this thread that reform is needed but not by throwing disabled children and broken women/families under the bus whilst looking the other way and shrugging your shoulders.

I’m so sorry, this sounds truly a nightmare

Problem is as seen nobody is happy with any answer that isn’t basically throw more money at it. But we don’t have an unlimited money pot. People have to pay taxes to put the money in that pot. When we don’t have enough going in we cannot just keep spending and borrowing.

Nobody wants to think of their child, their sisters their mother or their brother or rather or niece or nephew as not worth it or less than and of course those words shouldn’t be said.

But we need tax payers to fund everything the local councils and government fund. If we have more people taking than giving it doesn’t work.

Life sadly and I mean it sincerely isn’t fluffy unicorns and rainbows as I’m sure Sen parents know the most. The safety net really is only as safe as those paying the tax payers pay the tax.

So what is the NON emotional answer. Take out emotions and feelings. How do we fix a financial problem, purely from a money point of view how do we fix giving all children an education one that’s viable and works and give benefit to the children and the future workforce.

After all we need all the future tax payers we can get to fund those booming pensions.

Thank you, it’s appreciated. Reading it back I’ve realised it reads like a pity party and it’s not meant to, it’s just life. It’s just the way it is and that’s ok. I just thought that some of the posters on this thread needed to realise what they’re suggesting forcing thousands of women in to. It will mostly be women who pay the price for some of these suggestions.

I completely agree reform is needed. Reform that is considered, measured and impactful. Mass institutions, forcing home education and other such suggestions are none of those things, nor, by equal measure is continuing in as we are and pretending the funding problem will go away.

I am absolutely confident that my son will be one of the children left alone by the proposed reforms but many vulnerable children will suffer because this is the latest cohort of people chosen to become the common enemy. Reform is needed, yes, but let’s consider who we’re throwing under the bus first.

I am really sorry to break this to you @Lostatsea10 but it's been a long long time since government finances worked by taxpayers' money going into some kind of finite "pot" and then when it's gone it's gone. I mean, we're still paying for borrowings to fund WW1 and only relatively recently finished paying for the Boer War (!) never mind more recent events. And let us not enquire what would happen if the Americans asked for the WW2 loan back...

Even household finances don't work like that or else none of us would have mortgages, student loans, credit cards, car finance...

So as an economist my question is: why is it this particular spending that's the issue? Why SEN education? Is it because it's an easy target? Is it because as pp implies, the adult fallout will mostly affect women?

I personally think it's good that people are willing to say the unsayable online as at least then you know what they're thinking.

Of course, just like with the revolting discourse around adult disability, every child is only a serious accident or illness away from needing support at school.

I’m not sure that was for me @Needlenardlenoo. I agree with you, I’m fully aware it’s because we (SEND families) are easy targets.

We KNOW the answer.

Return education funding in real terms to where it was per child 15 years ago.
LAs to comply with the 2014 SEN Code not pay lipservice to it (particularly the parts about working in partnership with children and their parents).
Pay TAs realistically.
Repair or replace school buildings (my school lost 90% of its capital budget in 2010. 90%!)
Give more options for education not fewer.
Give vocational education more status (the Swiss system is a model we might look at carefully).
Treat education as a long term investment not a cost.
How much money have neurodiverse people made in Silicon Valley? Treat neurodivergence as an opportunity not a threat.

Sorry! You're right, it was a reply to @Tableforjoan.

This is a huge amount of money for one child.

I work in a state funded SEMH secondary and the maximum we get for a child is around 40k and that’s only about 3/4 of them.

Obviously LAs have to rely on independent providers too but the most I’ve heard about for similar children in those is around 80-90k.

That amount must be reserved for those children who have the most significant, complex needs and need 1-1, or higher ratio, with a lot of health complications.

Which isn’t the majority of children with SEN. My own son’s school receive around £6k in top up funding for his EHCP.

I suspect there are a lot of private sector organisations making a lot of money somewhere.

We really need to provide more state facilities rather than children being funded to go to independent schools. I know nothing about specialist schools, so won’t comment on that, but I’ve seen a few posters talking about children being funded to go to independent non-specialist schools - surely if their needs can be met there then they could equally well be met in state schools with adaptations?

You're looking at a specific population for statistics.

You are looking at children. The population where underdiagnosis occurs is in adults, often women, and especially BAME communities.

Of course you will see more children in school these days on the pathway to or already having acquired a diagnosis compared to adult populations, because there are more accessible resources towards children as the key is earlier intervention, with huge backlogs and delays in older populations.

So there is still an underdiagnosis issue, but as has been repeatedly pointed out, a diagnosis doesn't automatically mean support by means of funds or services for anybody, whether young or old.

If you strictly look at classrooms your figures are going to be fairly skewed.

I know its unbelievable and such a worry

Our situation
Child can not attend school. LA and school refuse to consider alternatives. Refuse section 19. But are quite vocal in suggesting home Ed.

I suggest we start charging every parent for education. £3k per.child per year.
Those who home Ed don't have to pay. The money currently coming from taxes and central government can be used to provide TAs and additional support to any child who needs it. Smaller classes for every child. Flexible curriculum.
Removal of fines or threats for absence.

Jesus - you do realize a child person can become disabled at anytime. I hope you don't have to experience this but I think it may be the only way you could possible understand

You see £4 billion extra spending next year, in a system that has been grossly underfunded for decades, in the context of total government spending of £1,232 billion this year, an issue? Get real!

When my DDs first entered formal education about 25 years ago, the SEN system was reckoned to be underfunded by £4 billion then, and the gap has only got bigger!

Councils are on the verge of financial collapse due to a deliberate policy of underfunding by the Conservatives, who believed in a “small state”; and it is ludicrous to blame parents and disabled children for the effects of right wing ideology. Labour are just Conservatives Lite!

We paid off all of our war debt, WW2 included, on 29th Dec 2006. I’m surprised an economist doesn’t know that.

Costs of SEN education are booming for 2 major reasons: 1) there is an increased need for education, we’ve been in an educational arms race for years and most jobs need a degree where a-levels sufficed. Almost all jobs need at least basic maths and English GCSEs where nothing sufficed. So education is needed more. No parent can afford to watch their child sit at the back of a mainstream class, be ignored for 12 - 14 years, muck about the entire time and learn nothing. Which used to be fully acceptable.

Secondly SEN schools were privatised and many owned by private equity firms who bill the council huge, and I mean huge amounts per child which the staff see very little of. Think £10000 a WEEK. I worked for one which had obscure and opaque finance chains going through Luxembourg.

Oops sorry, WW1 debt paid off Dec 2014, by George Osbourne. Just WW2 in 2006. The US fleeced us for it (so you can take their current shite about how much they’ve done for us for the little that it’s worth. They’ve always been very dodgy horse traders and the special relationship was always bunkum).

Hi @WaryCrow have you got references for the economic history? I'd be interested to learn more about the specifics. The article I read said the government are still paying for the Consols.
I'm an Economics teacher not a specialist in war debt so I'm not being snarky. I'd like to be correct!

Given that I teach and have a SEND child with an EHCP I'm aware of the other things you mention. And the private equity and profit motive that has infected all sorts of services (not just SEND).

Do you not agree though, that the government has created an artificial crisis likely so they can remove the statutory obligations LAs have under the Sencop 2014? That money can always be found when something's considered important?

That would be awesome! Maybe they can net it off against my work as a state school teacher, and I can counter charge the thousands we spent on assessments and therapy, which the state doesn't provide.

My local authority had actually run out of primary school places in my area when I was looking for my DC just over a decade ago. They did eventually create some more but I'd have been pretty unhappy to be billed for a service they were unable to provide.

Yes but you've got to be able to get them IN. Schools can say they can't "meet need" and parents can't force a school place through without going to tribunal with waits of a year or more. There's just no capacity and the government has no solution for the lack of staff, although they've offered money for buildings and training. Whose staffing the buildings? Who's getting trained? My school does well with staffing compared to others but we have almost no slack.

Problem is while people seem quite happy to leave disabled children without a suitable education. I doubt many people would be happy paying and there would definitely be uproar against allowing some children to not have an education if the parents can't afford it.