If you’re a SEND parent and you’ve been hearing phrases like “Experts at Hand”, “Individual Support Plans” and “Specialist Provision Packages”, you could be forgiven for wondering what on earth is actually happening.

There has been a huge amount of discussion around the Government’s proposed SEND reforms in England.

The Government says it wants to create a system where families receive support earlier, without having to fight “tooth and nail” for it.

That ambition sounds positive.

Most SEND parents would probably agree that children shouldn’t have to deteriorate before somebody finally helps them.

But there is also considerable concern about what happens to the individual legal protections families currently rely upon, particularly EHCPs.

So let’s strip away the political language and explain what is actually being proposed.

First: are EHCPs being abolished?

No — but access to them is proposed to change significantly.

Under the Government’s proposals, EHCPs would remain for children and young people whose needs qualify for a new nationally defined Specialist Provision Package.

The Government says those EHCPs would provide a legal entitlement to the provision contained within that package. GOV.UK

However, the consultation also says:

“only children and young people who need the overall package of support detailed in a Specialist Provision Package will be entitled to an EHCP”

For children whose needs can be supported without one of those packages, the expectation would instead be that their education setting provides support through the new system. GOV.UK

That’s the part many parents are concerned about.

What would replace an EHCP for other children?

One of the new mechanisms is called an:

Individual Support Plan — or ISP.

This is the correct terminology; you may also have seen people mistakenly referring to an “IHCP”.

The Government proposes placing a legal duty on education settings to create ISPs for children receiving targeted or specialist SEND support.

The ISP would record things such as:

• the child’s barriers to learning
• provision
• reasonable adjustments
• intended outcomes.

It would be developed with parents and reviewed at least annually. GOV.UK

That may sound similar to an EHCP.

But they are not the same thing.

An EHCP is currently an individual statutory plan backed by specific legal duties, including the local authority’s duty to secure the special educational provision specified in it.

The proposed ISP is a different mechanism, largely operated at education-setting level.

That distinction is at the heart of much of the current debate.

So what is “Experts at Hand”?

This is one of the Government’s flagship ideas.

The basic principle is actually quite straightforward:

bring specialists closer to children instead of making children wait until they reach crisis before accessing specialist help.

Experts at Hand is being introduced across England from September 2026.

Depending on local provision, mainstream settings will be able to access professionals including:

• educational psychologists
• occupational therapists
• speech and language therapists
• specialist teachers.

Importantly, children will not need a diagnosis before they can benefit from Experts at Hand support. GOV.UK

The Government is investing £1.8 billion over three years in the programme. GOV.UK

And honestly?

There is a lot about that principle that I like.

Early intervention is exactly what SEND families have been asking for

Think about the current experience of many families.

A child starts struggling.

School puts some strategies in place.

Things get worse.

The parent asks for help.

Everyone waits.

The child’s attendance deteriorates.

Their anxiety increases.

The family starts fighting for assessment.

Months pass.

Sometimes years pass.

Eventually the child reaches crisis.

Then suddenly everybody agrees they need specialist support.

That is completely backwards.

If Experts at Hand means an occupational therapist, educational psychologist, speech and language therapist or genuinely knowledgeable specialist can become involved before that child reaches breaking point, that’s potentially a very positive change.

The Government also says Experts at Hand is an additional service and does not currently replace existing EHCP support or statutory duties. GOV.UK

But there’s an enormous question.

Where are all these experts coming from?

This is where I think parents are entitled to ask difficult questions.

Because if my autistic child cannot cope inside a classroom, I don’t simply need somebody to walk into school and say:

“Have you tried a movement break?”

I need somebody capable of understanding:

Why can’t this child cope in this classroom?

Is it sensory overload?

Communication?

Anxiety?

Executive functioning?

The physical environment?

Autistic burnout?

Unmanageable demands?

Or several of these things interacting?

The word “expert” matters.

A job title alone doesn’t necessarily mean somebody has specialist expertise in every presentation of autism, ADHD, PDA, sensory processing or complex SEND.

And there’s another issue.

Many families are already struggling to access some of the professionals Experts at Hand intends to provide.

So parents are reasonably asking:

How many additional professionals will actually be available?

The Government says it will expand the educational psychology workforce, including investment in training more than 200 new educational psychologists per year from 2026 and 2027. GOV.UK

But this is an enormous national programme.

Parents will want to see whether the workforce actually exists to deliver what is being promised.

Why are parents worried about legal rights?

This is probably the most important part to understand.

The concern isn’t necessarily:

“Early intervention is bad.”

It isn’t.

Nor is it:

“Experts in schools are bad.”

They aren’t.

The concern is what happens if access to individually enforceable statutory provision becomes narrower while families are expected to rely more heavily on support delivered through mainstream settings.

The Government argues its reforms will actually strengthen the legal framework by introducing new duties on settings and creating nationally consistent support. GOV.UK

Campaigners are worried that some children who might currently obtain an EHCP could instead receive an ISP without equivalent individual statutory protections.

Those are two different interpretations of the proposed system.

And parents deserve to understand both.

What happens to my child’s existing EHCP?

This is important because there has been a lot of frightening information circulating online.

Nothing suddenly happens to your child’s EHCP today.

The Government’s consultation says the current system, with its existing rights, duties and funding routes, will remain until new legislation takes effect, which is not expected before September 2029.

It also says there will be:

“No changes to support received through EHCPs before at least September 2030.” GOV.UK

Children and young people already in specialist placements are also promised protection for their placement until the end of their education. Consultation Hub

So please don’t panic and think your child’s EHCP disappears next month.

It doesn’t.

But that doesn’t mean parents shouldn’t pay attention to what is being proposed for the future.

Why the Save Our Children’s Rights campaign matters

This is why so many SEND families have been supporting the Protect legal right to support for children with SENDpetition created by autistic young campaigner Tee-Jay Chetwynd.

The petition argues that the reforms could restrict EHCP access and weaken important individual rights.

The Government disputes that characterisation and says its reforms will strengthen legal duties and maintain EHCPs for children with complex needs. Petitions UK

But something significant has now happened.

The petition has passed 100,000 signatures.

As of 30 September, it had more than 104,000 signatures, meaning the Petitions Committee will consider it for debate in Parliament. Petitions UK

That is a significant achievement for the SEND community.

What is Lucy Powell saying?

Since becoming Education Secretary, Lucy Powell has been defending the direction of SEND reform while acknowledging the anxiety surrounding it.

The central Government argument is essentially:

families shouldn’t have to fight for an EHCP simply to make ordinary support happen.

Support should arrive earlier.

Schools should have more resources.

Specialists should be closer to children.

Needs should be identified before they escalate.

Again, those objectives are difficult to disagree with.

The real argument is about how we get there and what protections children retain along the way.

This shouldn’t become “EHCPs versus early intervention”

That’s a false choice.

SEND parents shouldn’t have to choose between:

early help

or

legal protection.

Why can’t we have both?

Put occupational therapists in schools.

Increase educational psychologists.

Improve teacher training.

Provide speech and language support earlier.

Give schools enough money to make genuine reasonable adjustments.

Stop forcing families to wait years before intervention.

Absolutely.

But at the same time, where a child’s needs require individually specified and enforceable provision, parents understandably want confidence that those protections remain available.

What happens if we get this right?

Potentially, something genuinely transformative.

Imagine noticing at seven that a child is struggling.

Instead of waiting until they’re eleven, barely attending school and experiencing severe anxiety, somebody intervenes immediately.

The school gets specialist advice.

The environment changes.

Teachers understand the child’s needs.

Parents aren’t required to become amateur lawyers.

The child remains engaged with education.

That is what early intervention should look like.

But what happens if we get it wrong?

That’s why this matters so much.

If access to statutory protection becomes narrower before mainstream schools and Experts at Hand are genuinely capable of meeting children’s needs, some families fear children could fall into a gap.

Not complex enough for the new EHCP threshold.

But far too complex for ordinary mainstream provision.

Those are precisely the children parents are worried about.

Because SEND families already know what happens when a child falls between thresholds.

They wait.

Their attendance deteriorates.

Their mental health deteriorates.

Their family reaches crisis.

Then everyone asks:

“How did things get this bad?”

The question SEND parents should keep asking

I don’t think the SEND community needs to oppose every reform.

The current system clearly isn’t working properly for far too many families.

Change is necessary.

But parents are entitled to ask:

Who qualifies for an EHCP under the new system?

Who decides whether my child needs a Specialist Provision Package?

What exactly will an ISP legally guarantee?

Who are the Experts at Hand in my area?

How quickly can my child actually see them?

What specialist training will they have?

What happens if their support doesn’t work?

What can I challenge or appeal?

And perhaps most importantly:

What happens to the child who doesn’t fit neatly into either system?

Those questions aren’t parents resisting reform.

They’re parents doing what SEND parents have learned to do:

looking at the detail.

The bottom line

The Government is promising something SEND families have wanted for years:

earlier intervention, more expertise in mainstream schools and less fighting for help.

That deserves serious consideration.

But reassurance alone isn’t enough when you’re redesigning a system that determines children’s education and legal entitlements.

SEND parents need to see the detail.

They need to see the workforce.

They need to understand the safeguards.

And they need confidence that no child will lose meaningful support simply because the name of the plan has changed.

So my position is straightforward:

Earlier help? Yes.

Experts in schools? Yes.

Better mainstream SEND provision? Absolutely.

But before changing children’s existing routes to statutory protection:

prove the replacement can actually deliver.

Because SEND reform isn’t just about reorganising a system.

It’s about what happens to our children when that system gets it wrong.

Help Protect SEND Children’s Rights

If you haven’t already signed the Save Our Children’s Rights petition, please take a moment to do so.

Whatever your view on SEND reform, we believe one principle should remain clear:

Earlier intervention should strengthen support for our children — not come at the expense of their legal rights and protections.

The SEND community has worked incredibly hard to make its voice heard. Please add yours.

Sign the petition, share it with friends and family, and help keep children’s rights at the centre of SEND reform.

Sign the Save Our Children’s Rights petition

Our children need better support. They also need their rights protected.