Special Needs Reforms Risk Becoming ‘Welfare Reforms Mark 2,’ Warns IFS

Published: 12 September 2025 | English Chronicle Desk

A new report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has raised concerns that planned reforms to special educational needs and disability (Send) provision in England could be perceived as a repeat of contentious welfare reforms, unless the government convincingly demonstrates that the changes are not primarily driven by cost-cutting.

The thinktank’s briefing highlights that any adjustments to the current system of Education, Health, and Care Plans (EHCPs)—which legally mandate tailored support for children with special needs—are likely to provoke strong reactions from parents. While the report acknowledges that reform is “long overdue,” it also notes that the number of EHCPs issued has surged by 80% since 2018, reflecting both growing demand and systemic inefficiencies. At present, roughly one in twenty school-age children in England holds an EHCP.

The IFS warned that a mismanaged reform could spark public backlash reminiscent of the government’s earlier reversal on disability and health-related benefits following a significant parliamentary revolt. The briefing, titled England’s Send Crisis, stresses that the government must clearly communicate that the intent of reform is to improve services rather than reduce entitlements.

“Any reforms are likely to generate controversy. If the focus is on reducing legal rights to cut short-term costs, this could easily turn into welfare reforms mark 2,” the report stated. It emphasized that a successful overhaul should articulate a clear vision for a system that supports all children while delivering better value for money.

Luke Sibieta, co-author of the IFS briefing, noted that the success of reforms hinges on how the forthcoming white paper is presented. “If the focus of what’s in the white paper, and how it is sold, is all about saving money and reducing burdens, then it’s very hard to see how this policy will go through. But if it is about providing a better quality of service or earlier access to support, in an easier and better way, then I can see how the policy can be successful. When you talk to parents, no one actually likes the EHCP process.”

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is also expected to face challenges convincing the Treasury that additional funding is necessary, particularly for the expansion of dedicated state-funded special schools and specialized Send units within mainstream schools. The IFS report argues that increasing the number of state schools could reduce reliance on costly private special schools, where the average annual cost per pupil is £62,000 compared to £24,000 in the state sector. The number of pupils attending private special schools has tripled since 2016, contributing nearly £1 billion of the £4 billion annual rise in high-needs spending.

The briefing also criticized the effectiveness of EHCPs, which are intended to guarantee support for children. “EHCPs are meant to guarantee help. However, you cannot magic quality into existence by writing it on a legal document,” the report states. Many children reportedly spend significant portions of their school day receiving support from poorly trained teaching assistants, missing crucial time with qualified teachers. There is currently no reliable way to assess whether the billions in extra funding are delivering value for money.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education responded to the report, stating: “This government inherited a Send system left on its knees – which is why we are listening closely to parents as we work to improve experiences and outcomes for all children with Send, wherever they are in the country. Our starting point will always be improving support for children.”

As England prepares for potential reforms, parents, educators, and policymakers alike will be closely watching how the government balances the need for improved support with the pressures of cost management, ensuring that children with special needs are placed at the center of any systemic changes.