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.

As an example Hampshire County Council spent £100 million in 24 / 25 just for the provision of SEN transport, alongside figures in addition of £26 million on looking after just 37 of the most vulnerable in their care! Sustainable, I don't think so.

No that’s exactly how it came across to me, so I don’t know it. And obviously I don’t know everyone’s situation but I’ve worked and volunteered in many roles relating to disabilities and I have seen quite a range of situations but again that’s completely irrelevant because again funding should not be made based on emotional appeals. Many things have to be taken into consideration when deciding how to spend a limited amount of money. That it upsets people is not especially important.

@Lougle I’d like to see the breakdown too. Maybe this is including costs to defend if appealed to tribunal?

DS1 only had an EP assessment at early stage. It wasn’t until appeal and pending tribunal for inadequate EHCP that LA sought SALT and OT reports by which time they had to pay for private reports to meet the deadline.

It would help if costs of not giving an appropriate EHCP with the cost of reports and tribunal and the cost of LA staff time, only to be over-turned at tribunal and concede private specialist placement (conceded on the day of court hearing within 30 minutes Ime) together with the costs of EOTAS whilst the child was left without placement were factored in.

There are tens of thousands of pounds spent before conceding independent placement. And the reason for independent placement is often lack of early intervention leading to crisis. And the reason it’s independent and OOC is lack of appropriate local state provision. And the reason that LAs are in financial crisis is because they can’t meet statutory obligations without recourse to buying services from private for profit groups that fill the gap because it is a good investment opportunity.

Nothing about this is about meeting the needs of SEND DC.

Your fine sit in your echo chamber of all SEN Professionals are bad.

Stop making things up. I haven’t said any such thing.

MN withdrew her posts because she asked. That doesn’t mean she was bullied. She wasn’t. The thread is there for all to read, including some parts of her posts that were C&P by other posters when they were replying.

The £26m you refer to is for social care placements, not education.

No disputing that is a huge cost, but it’s not an education cost. It’s likely for a 52 week of the year care placement.

You know how people quite often tell SENd parents to just put their kids in residential…. That.

Sorry but no one told me that I could only hold an approved set of opinions as a disabled person. I thought that we were all individuals but apparently we’re supposed to be one homogenous single minded entity.

I think that many things will have to be cut unfortunately and I do not think that special needs education and other disability provision should be or can be immune from that. You cannot expect people to be ok with losing libraries, leisure centres and various other services and having waste lying everywhere and roads becoming more pothole than road and basically receiving nothing in return. Everyone has to feel that they are getting something in return for their taxes, like it or not that’s human nature and it’s insane to expect them to be so selfless that they’re happy for their families to go without in order to help complete strangers with little return.

I lost my previous job because of council cuts so you’d think that I’d be even more against it but I think that the council were right to cut that service. I did the admin and coordinating for a secondary care service that involved providing companionship and some basic cleaning/tidying for people who already received other care so someone who had carers in 4x a day had someone coming in to get them shopping even though they were quite capable of doing online shopping and that the carers were happy to bring in a few items from the supermarket next year. There’s no doubt that it helped the clients to an extent but it was an absolutely insane idea that often resulted in 2 sets of carers in at once and one of those just sitting around. Or helping to bathe someone who could and did regularly bathe without help, sometimes staff would go in the morning and they’d already bathed themselves. It was never sustainable and they were right to cut it.

It should have been reserved for extreme situations like terminal illness, extremely challenging behaviour and to provide respite for families so yes I agree that cuts are needed at times.

That said I am more interested in using money in an efficient and sensible manner as such than cuts and sometimes that means spending more money so for example it’s better to spend 10K on a piece of equipment that works for someone and is actually useful than to give them a 5k wheelchair that doesn’t help them and may actually make their health issues worse but I do think that a mixture of that and cuts are going to be necessary.

Not sure what the first paragraph is for, I said you’re entitled to whatever opinion you have, whether you’re disabled or not.

I just would assume that a disabled person would be an advocate for other disabled people, and not promote cuts that mean their needs are unmet or harder to meet. That’s my assumption.

I would also point out that if you claim PIP, which I’m obviously not sure if you do, but also believe in disability cuts - that would be very hypocritical.

I don’t claim any disability related benefits.

That is disgusting! I have a disabled relative who I have some caring responsibilities for and I am critical of disability spending and SEN spending. Trying to suggest that disabled people should all have the same opinions on things is odd and insulting. They can be capable of critical thought and analysis and coming to their own conclusion like everyone else.

I intervened and asked for the posts to be removed on her behalf as she was mentally distraught. I am one of the few she trusts. She then removed herself from MN at myself, other close friends and husbands insistence.

Comments such as she should work in a low paying job. How dare she want to earn money for a future to pay towards a home and pension. She was stuck on benefits for a long time due to not being able to work due to health. She grew up in the care system where she was bullied for being a foster kid by the kids in school. I saw her that day those comments were made. She had just resigned and felt guilty she was leaving the system and brought me flowers to apologise. She herself did not receive an education as she was told she was educationally subnormal and worth educating due to being deaf, with undiagnosed dyslexia and autism. Punished by professionals for complaining about being SA by her foster dad. Left school with no qualifications and went back to education as an adult. Fended for herself from 16 with no savings, no opportunities just more abuse from DV until she grabbed the opportunity to go to college. She was trying to share that she is an example of the right support being in place meaning that a SEND person can achieve. The price she paid for transparency was vilification from some MN bullies.

Regards to section F provisions, I said the unscrupulous £30-£60,000 year provisions entice the parents and CYP in with extra curricula's. They are not delivering an education to the CYP that prepares them for adulthood. Then the Post 16 teams are left picking up the pieces as the YP is turning 21 + with no qualifications and job prospects. Theses Independents and AP owners do not give a damn about the kids. They care about increasing their bank balances. The genuine and effective provisions that make a genuine difference have waiting lists due to being effective. The unscrupulous jump in knowing they need to do very little for the money. After all unqualified staff cost less than qualified and trained/experienced staff. That money could be used to make a real difference for the CYP who need it to support a YP into employment or further education.

This is a misunderstanding of national insurance. It is essentially an employment tax. It is not earmarked for anything in particular.

Regardless of whether I do or don’t claim PIP I’m not sure why I have to agree with how special needs education, benefits and other provision is used and administered? Surely there’s some nuance allowed? I might agree with it in some circumstances and not in others. I might agree with the continuation of disability related benefits but not the finer details. It doesn’t have to be one extreme or the other. Likewise I can believe that special needs education is incredibly important but have issues with certain aspects of it. Oh but then I’m disabled so I’m only allowed a select set of pre approved opinions.

As I said, just because posts were removed at the poster’s request (MNHQ’s wording) does not mean she was bullied. She wasn’t. Calling her out on judgemental posts and incorrect information is not the same as bullying.

As I said, and as your friend was told on the previous thread, what you perceive to be ‘extras’ are actually classed as education.

As I also said, yes, there are poor APs. Just like there are poor LA provisions and schools.

So you’d like your disabled relative to potentially have less?

I won’t take that “disgusting” comment too personally, if so.

Again well done to those taking the time and effort to try to educate and reduce hyperbole.

The poster that said parents of SEND kids should just look after them more themselves. You do realise many are doing just that full time 24/7.

My child gets 9 hours a week education that I have to supervise (required illegally by the LA). He is in my care ALL the time. No respite, no break. We have been awarded s whopping 2 hours a week of PA but I uave to advertise, find and employ said OA. Then make sure they are appropriately trained, support them to build a relationship with my child etc before I can then leave them for hrs a week which is NOT allowed to be in school hours because education is so important....

That 2 hours wouldnt be long enough to take my daughter to her football or for any appointment I may need. Its not long enough to do anything other than weekly food shop or a walk. But that is ALL the time off feom caring the local authority deem necessary. For a complex needs child. I have soent today juggling care for him, fielding phone calls,emails, admin etc enough to be a job in itself.. all relating to him. I am on unpaid parental leave and ultimately will lose my job.

The LA have conceded section I and offered eotas, (after insisting he was fine in mainstream he couldn't attend and they themselves said he wasnt doing any learning when he did attend) as no specialist to meet need in county. But they are STILL paying a barrister to go against me in tribunal because I am trying to ensure that section F is specific and quantified so that he gets provision to meet his needs. I am not asking for anything special swimming once a week as recommended by the OT, some recommendations for ongoing cognitive assessment by the EP again recommended not by private reports but the LA ones themselves. Support for his needs all outlined in section B. And the LA want to get away with wording so vague he would get little to no education.

I have battled the local authority not because I want anything over and above but because like his siblings and any other child he is entitled to an education.

And our vulnerable are entitled to social care support too.

If you want to care for a complex needs child 24/7, minus 2 hrs once a week. Run a household, work do all the admin and care needs associated please feel free to volunteer as am sure there are families in your community who need support. But dont spout nonsense about parent carers needing to DO more. Because many like me are doing all this and more, on minimal sleep and running on fumes.

I'm sure I'm as selfish as the average person but my main objection to the SEND system as it stands is that LAs have been allowed to actually get away with breaking the law in a way that would cause absolute outcry were it to happen in any other aspect of public services, and the poor quality of the work they actually do.

And because I'm averagely selfish, I'd like SEND parents (mostly mums) able to go out to work if they want and need to, not stuck at home picking up the pieces of other people's policy failures.

My daughter's EHCP is incredibly poorly written and it took two years of my life to get it. I would be embarrassed to be as poorly organised and lacking in knowledge and communication skills as some (not all) of the professionals I encountered.

Because the law overpromised and they can’t fulfil it.

You don’t have to agree. I’ll remind you again that I said everyone is entitled to an opinion, including you.

Whether you’re entitled to an opinion has absolutely nothing to do with whether you’re disabled or not.

You’re entitled to an opinion, I’m entitled to mine that people with disabilities advocating for disability cuts is a bit like turkeys begging for Christmas.

Absolutely nobody has said that your disability means you can’t have an opinion, so repeating that is completely unhelpful.

No, I want the system that supports them to be sustainable and fair. It may mean they get less in the short term but the long term is more secure.

Likewise. I’d much rather see cuts where and when necessary than see the support system collapse entirely.

I’ve said this on here before but a project that I was involved with as a volunteer advocacy worker , one that helped people with disabilities, collapsed entirely because some other volunteers put emotions first and refused to accept that we had to limit the service because the funding was no longer there to keep it at the same level they were accustomed to. They liked Fred so didn’t want to see Fred’s use of the service restricted to once a week where previously he’d used it 3x a week. Thanks to their inability to accept reality and put reason over emotions the service collapsed entirely and Fred and others wound up with no service at all. Who exactly did that help?

This is a question meant genuinely so I would hopefully like genuine answers back please. For those of you who think cuts need to be made- what does that look like for you? If you woke tomorrow with a magic wand and complete autonomy over the money and decision making, what would you do?

I’d look very closely at any for-profit organisations being involved.

I’d ban LAs for paying for spaces at non-specialist independent schools and instead have at least one smaller school in each LA to meet the needs of children who simply need a calmer environment.

I’d stop allowing parental appeals if a school says they can meet needs.

I outlined above that I want a SEN budget set centrally that is fixed and is a fair proportion of public spending. This should be consulted with the general public so we understand the population's priorities and then set budgets accordingly. I imagine this will be lower or the same as the making currently spent on SEN. I then would look at allocating individuals money based on needs but capped within certain levels. A bit like PIP is currently where you have low, medium, high etc. Then I would want parents to work with professionals to work out a spending plan. I would welcome parents being funded to transport their children and care for them at home as part of this if appropriate.

Thank you for answering, I’m sure you have answered up thread but there is a lot of noise on here and so I appreciate you both taking the time to respond.

I remember that thread. I understand the OP was really upset, but getting upset is not the same as being bullied and shouldn't be used to shut other people's opinions/voices/experiences down. There were plenty of people on that thread that had had their own very traumatic experiences.