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.

I think accountability would solve a lot. Cost orders against LAs who go all the way to SENDIST without a clear case or evidence that they have a reasonable chance of winning. Our LA wins less than 1%, they pursue appeal because the 14 month wait is seen as a way to save money.
LGO to be able to issue financially punitive penalties rather than token recompense. If LA have profited from unlawful behaviour penalties should be 125% of savings.
If there were less incentives for LA's to behave badly then services would improve which would cut admin costs freeing funding for provision

The problem seems to be the very wide-reaching definition of SEN - currently it is defined in such a way that every child with even the smallest difference or difficulty that stands out of the majority cohort is now put on 'SEN monitoring'. Including children in Reception and Y1 who just want to play and not exactly sit at the desk and write stories when they cannot yet form letters properly. However, once the child is put on SEN register, it opens up a lot of opportunities for the child and parents - like claiming a disability benefit or getting more time during exams later. So I suspect the coming SEND reform is going to address this, because it's ridiculous that we have currently 20% of students on SEN register at some point of life compared to 5-6% in the EU. Hopefully, the return to play-based curriculum in KS1 in England is going to help with that because we cannot continue to put on SEN register 5-year olds who cry at the desk because they cannot write a story and claim they have a communication problem.

That just simply isn't true.

A child doesn't need to be on the SEN register or even have a diagnosis at all to be eligible for DLA. It is all about care needs.

A child also isn't going to get extra time on exams at 16 just because they were on a SEN register at 5.

We need to accept that severely developmentally disabled children don’t need an education.

Yes!

Over the years, my LA has spent 6 figures defending appeals I have made to the FtT for DSs’ EHCPs. Barristers, solicitors, paralegals. Including a very nice sum to a barrister to turn up late on the morning of one final hearing and concede. That isn’t including the money the LA has spent on internal staff dealing with my appeals to SENDIST. Neither does it include the costs the LA has incurred when I have pursued JR proceedings, their costs related to my complaints and LGO claims, or a small claims court case.

like claiming a disability benefit or getting more time during exams later.

Eligibility for disability benefits is not based on being on the SEN register. Being on the SEN register does not mean DC will be eligible for disability benefits. And not being on the SEN register does not mean DC aren’t eligible for disability benefits. EAA, including extra time, aren’t based on being on the SEN register either.

What an ignorant comment.

What do they need instead? Because even just safe daycare for children with severe learning disabilities is very expensive.

Edit to add: often the soaring costs of SEND are not actually due to the relatively small number of children with severe learning disabilities. A lot of this spend is down to mainstream schools not coping with / supporting autistic children without LD or children with SEMH, some of whom become very mentally ill because of their experiences. Independent special schools then hold LAs over a barrel due to the complete lack of appropriate state special schools.

She is one of the least judgemental individuals I know. She has spent years studying the theory of SEND education to go with the lived expertise as a disabled woman. In fact the only people she judges are those who are corrupt or manipulate systems for their gain. What she is a survivor who is a perfectionist due to trauma and autism and terrified of making mistakes and not wanting to be a professional who fails others. God knows she was failed and punished by the system literally has the internal and external scars.

Burnt herself out going above and beyond for the parents, CYP. Neglected her own health worked more hours than required, (lost sleep worrying about the vulnerable young people)which then declined. Considering the worst posts were removed how can you state that were not bulling. She was told she was weak, evil and should not have aspirations. She was the problem making a living working for an LA. She should just work in a burger place if she wants money. No pension, no savings no family support. Worked to get herself off benefits and become a higher tax payer to try and pay back into the system.

How very bulling and ableist of you and others. Would you prefer she just claim full benefits she is entitled to do so. She wants to work though even though she is studying how evil of her to do a PhD to challenge the narrative of SEND policy. She does not want to take more form the system that is already on its knees. Yes she challenges unfairness and manipulation of the system.

Do you think that SEND people should not have ambition or want to achieve. The SEND CoP 2015 is built on the premise that SEND CYP are supported to achieve to the highest of their potential. So to belittle and be directly personal and nasty towards someone who is being transparent and honest about what is happening in the system while managing confidentiality is not bullying. Not sure how else you would describe it other than bullying. Once she recovered it did do her a favour, she is using those posts to support the evidence of how language impacts a person’s education experience. Fortunately she does have people to support her and remind her she has some value in though she is not perfect at all times.

Strange though that you are absolutely certain at what education is? Considering it does not have a defined definition and had a different meaning depending on your philosophy. Even the educationalists do not have an absolute definition of what is education and creates ongoing debates. Which is one of the issues of education decisions as it depends on their philosophy.

@Bargepole45

Just on the idea that the public should be consulted on spend - how would that work?

There are many who have ideas on SENd budget and spend for example, that have absolutely no idea about it.

We have seen on this thread the idea that SENd children shouldn’t get hearing aids, when all children do. That we can select any school regardless of cost, when you can’t.

Why would those people, and others like them who don’t understand the system because they’re not in it, be qualified to make decisions on that system?

What a load of nonsense
Being on the SEN register means bugger all by itself and you certainly can't claim disability benefits for it
My now 19 year old was on it in primary school because he struggled with maths and English, essentially all that meant was he was taken out of class a couple of times a week with a few other kids for more reading and maths support
He ,s never been academic but he certainly doesnt have learning disabilities and would certainly not been eligible for DLa.

We dont HTH.

Definitely, last Tribunal LA did nothing but sit on the appeal. They conceded the day before the appeal to an EOTAS package 4x more expensive than the one they had refused and forced me to appeal. They then paid me £6k for failing to make provision in the 10 month wait. Last August they were ordered to pay me another £4k by LGO and in September they repeated the exact same thing again so I can expect more recompense this August.
Dd has a large and expensive EOTAS package. To meet the objective to secure level 3 qualifications LA need to find a way for this to happen for dd and the many others being educated out of school funded by LA.
We are now in the second year of waiting for LA to do this and heard last week it won't happen this year either so they will fund another year unnecessarily because they haven't bothered to sort an issue that has been repeatedly flagged for the last three years by me and our tutors and numerous others for even longer on the local EOTAS boards. LA incompetence knows no bounds IME.

And yet your ‘friend’ was judgemental on the thread you mentioned.

I have not bullied or belittled anyone. Neither have I been personal, ableist or nasty. I haven’t said that anyone should not have ambition or want to achieve either. Stop making things up.

There is a lot of case law on what is SEP. A person’s philosophy does not change what the law is.

Strategic incompetence at its finest. Another example of how saving money in the short term costs more in the long term. It is perfectly possible for DC with EOTAS/EOTIS/C to sit exams. Your LA needs to pull its finger out.

We have ‘spoken’ before. I have 2 DSs with comprehensive EOTAS/EOTIS packages.

"We need to accept that severely developmentally disabled children don’t need an education."

Another one with no clue.

Wtf. Why are we denying the rights of children 😭 there’s so much value in having an educated society and education comes in many forms

Having had a hard time does not make someone right.

Being challenged is not the same as being bullied (the overwhelming majority of posts were not removed and in fact I believe some of that OP's were removed for breaking Talk Guidelines).

Some of the things your friend said on that thread were just inaccurate. It is perfectly reasonable to point out inaccuracies.

You have no idea what some of us on that thread have gone through ourselves, we have a right to disagree with that OP.

Just like your friend doesn't like being mischaracterised, parents of disabled children do not like being mischaracterised as greedy, entitled, manipulative sharp elbowed grifters.

There is a danger this is becoming a bit of a TAAT.

Tbf it's giving d time to mature, she's benefiting from the SALT and OT and really loving EOTAS so if LA want to waste time and money they can play on. Today dd sat a mock GCSE Japanese exam completely blind just on what she had self taught and what her PA had been teaching her as she worked in Japan. It's not even her "recognised exam choices" more an interest and having a PA (previously teacher in AP) who shares her interests

Actually, I think there's some weight in that comment.
Not specifically for SEND children, but for all children. Some children are just not academic (and that's fine) we shouldn't be forcing them onto exam treadmills that they constantly fail. In the past kids could leave school without any GCSEs and actually get a job, people would employ them and lack of exams wasn't as much of a problem as it is today. These kids could go on to have great careers or become business owners or just get by ok doing valuable work that paid the bills.
Those days seem to be gone and exam results are all important.

What I don't understand about these 3:1 or 4:1 care packages is why the support staff can't be shared. There's no way that all four staff will be constantly busy caring for a child. There's simply not enough space around a child for four adults to occupy.

If three of the staff are employed on a 'just in case it kicks off' basis, why can't those staff be shared? For example, a class contains 8 children that all require 4:1 ratios, surely 8x 1on1 + 4x backup = 12 staff would be adequate?

"Actually, I think there's some weight in that comment.
Not specifically for SEND children, but for all children."

You mean that you agree that severely developmentally delayed shouldn't have the opportunity to learn to communicate or manage their own behaviour so that they don't constantly hurt themselves - because that is what that poster is suggesting.

Did I say you directly. Please do screenshot the posts she made and share where she was being judgmental of a MN poster.

The law was founded upon the biblical texts and philosophy which evolved to legal principles which creates policies (entomology) The law is then interpreted depending on the outcome you are trying to achieve ontology and epistemology with their philosophy is how they use the law to create their argument.

I said there is no one definition of what is education, case law supports precedent and future decisions for judgement not parliamentary changes in law. Therefore all underpinned by entomology and the professionals ontology and epistemology which is the same in education and why things change as there is no set definition it is due to interpretation and the argument you are making.

It will depend on the needs of the child.

My son has 2:1 due to his physical disability and the fact that he needs personal care regularly throughout the day.

You may also have children who need suctioning regularly, have a tracheostomy, need to have feeds through their g tube every 3 hours, need medication etc it really can be none stop with some children's needs and not necessarily always down to the fact that a child may be violent. My son isn't violent at all, as an example.

Did I say you directly.

Yes, you did say me directly.

“How very bulling and ableist of you and others. Would you prefer she just claim full benefits she is entitled to do so.”

“Do you think that SEND people should not have ambition or want to achieve. The SEND CoP 2015 is built on the premise that SEND CYP are supported to achieve to the highest of their potential. So to belittle and be directly personal and nasty towards someone who is being transparent and honest about what is happening in the system while managing confidentiality is not bullying. Not sure how else you would describe it other than bullying.”

The definition of SEP is defined in The Children and Families Act 2014. One’s philosophy does not change that. Nor does it change case law.

The poster in question had her posts withdrawn at poster’s request so how can I screenshot them. I would also be risking being deleted if I posted a screenshot from another thread and bringing onto this thread. But the thread is there for all to read. Including some quotes from the deleted ‘friend’s’ posts.

When you have no understanding of why children might need such a high level of support
Its probably best not to think you know better than the experts