EHCP Refusals and Re-Assessment: Sections A-K and How to Challenge

Under the SEND Regulations 2014 and the SEND Code of Practice, an EHC plan must contain:

• Section A: Views, interests and aspirations of the child/young person and family.
• Section B: Special educational needs (SEN).
• Section C: Health needs related to SEN.
• Section D: Social care needs related to SEN.
• Section E: Outcomes — what the plan aims to achieve.
• Section F: Special educational provision required. The legal heart of the plan. Must be specific, quantified, and clear.
• Section G: Health provision reasonably required.
• Section H1: Social care provision (under Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970).
• Section H2: Other social care provision.
• Section I: The name and type of school or other institution. Disputes about this section are the most common.
• Section J: Personal budget (only if requested and agreed).
• Section K: Advice and information appendices.

Section F is the part the LA must deliver. Vague Section F ("appropriate support", "intervention as required") is unlawful — provision must be specific and quantified (e.g. "1 hour per week 1:1 speech and language therapy from a fully qualified SLT").

Parents (or young people 16-25, or schools) can request a statutory needs assessment. The LA has 6 weeks to decide whether to assess. Refusal rates vary by LA — 20-30% at first request is typical.

The legal test for refusing to assess (Children and Families Act 2014 s.36(8)): the LA must consider whether the child "has or may have" special educational needs AND whether they "may need" special educational provision through an EHC plan. The bar is low. Refusal letters often misapply the test by saying the child does not "need" an EHC plan — but the legal question is whether they "may" need one.

Challenge route:

1. Engage in mediation (optional but recommended) — many LAs concede at this stage.
2. Appeal to the First-tier Tribunal SENDIST within 2 months of the refusal letter.
3. Tribunal hearing: usually 4-9 months after appeal lodged. Parent typically attends; LA represented by case officer or solicitor.
4. Decision: most refusal-to-assess appeals succeed. Tribunal orders the LA to carry out the assessment.

If the LA agrees to assess, they have 16 weeks from the start of assessment to either issue a draft plan or refuse to issue. Refusal at this stage is appealable to SENDIST.

Common LA reasoning at this stage:

• "The child's needs can be met from the school's ordinarily available resources" — i.e. SEN Support funded from the school's budget rather than top-up EHCP funding.
• "The child has not made adequate progress despite intervention" — but the LA argues the intervention has been adequate. The legal question is whether the child's needs require provision beyond what is ordinarily available, not whether the school has tried.
• "The child does not have an identifiable SEN that requires specialist intervention." — Often relies on a contested diagnostic question.

Evidence for appeal: school SEN records, educational psychology reports, OT/SLT reports, paediatric/psychiatric reports, your detailed account of impact on daily life. The tribunal will commission its own panel including a specialist member.

If the LA issues a plan you disagree with, the most common disputes are:

• Section B — needs are understated or omitted. Each diagnosed need must be specifically listed.
• Section F — provision is too vague, not quantified, or insufficient for the needs in Section B. "Specialist teacher support" without hours is unlawful.
• Section I — the LA names a mainstream school when the child needs a specialist school, or vice versa. The LA must name the parents' preferred school unless it would be unsuitable, incompatible with efficient education of others, or an inefficient use of resources (s.39 CAF 2014).
• Section J — personal budget refused; you wanted to direct your own provision.

The appeal route is the same — mediation, then SENDIST within 2 months of the final plan.

The LA must review every EHC plan annually (more frequently if needs change). Annual review must:

• Be held in a meeting attended by the parents/young person, school, and relevant professionals.
• Consider whether the plan continues to be appropriate, whether outcomes have been achieved, whether amendments are needed.
• Lead to a written outcome decision within 4 weeks of the meeting.

Three possible outcomes:

1. Plan continues unchanged.
2. Plan amended.
3. Plan ceased.

Any of these can be appealed to SENDIST within 2 months of the outcome letter. Annual review is a natural opportunity to push for changes — better-resourced provision, change of school placement, additional therapies. Come prepared with up-to-date evidence (recent OT/SLT reports, school progress data, your account of impact).

Re-assessment: if needs have changed significantly, request a re-assessment. The LA has 15 weeks to decide. Refusal to re-assess is appealable to SENDIST.

Five things that win EHC appeals:

• Get independent professional reports. School-based assessments are often light. An independent educational psychologist (£500-£1,200), specialist therapy assessments, and a parent-commissioned diagnostic report (autism, ADHD, dyslexia) carry significant weight at tribunal.
• Document impact in daily life. Specific examples of what the child cannot do safely, reliably, repeatedly — like the PIP descriptors.
• Get school evidence. Class teacher and SENCO statements, intervention logs, progress data.
• Use IPSEA, SOS!SEN, Coram Children's Legal Centre for free advice. They have model letters, template appeals, and casework support.
• Mediation is optional but useful. Many LAs concede before tribunal. Mediation does not stop the 2-month tribunal clock — file the appeal in parallel if needed.

Tribunal success rate: 95% of appeals heard succeed in whole or part. Many more are conceded before hearing. The system rewards persistence.