07/01/2026
My teen didn’t need an EHCP. She needed reasonable adjustments, but when they were refused by certain staff and EBSA took hold, I was forced to get an EHCP. (My child’s Tribunal order - quoted). 🧑⚖️
I keep seeing the same pattern over and over again with the families I support, especially in secondary academy schools. They’re often so rigid in their systems and behaviour policies that there’s little space left for individuality, flexibility, or humanity.
Many schools (not all ❄️) are failing to put basic, reasonable adjustments in place early, often things that don’t even cost money and this is leading directly to EBSA (Emotionally Based School Avoidance) for so many!
Sometimes adjustments are agreed by the SEND team, but individual teachers don’t consistently follow them. That’s when trust breaks down, children disengage, and difficulties escalate into full-blown absence.
Then, when an EHCP is applied for, it’s refused with the familiar line:
“School could meet needs under universal provision.”
And yes in theory, they often could.
But the problem is… they often don’t.
I see this all the time AND I’ve experienced with one of mine.
Reasonable adjustments at this stage can be simple things like:
• A pass to bypass crowds
• Movement breaks
• Adjustments to uniform
• A trusted adult to check in with
• Sitting out of lessons that cause severe distress
• Noise cancelling headphones
• Reduced or adapted homework expectations
• Toilet passes
• Leniency if a child with organisational difficulties forgets stationary instead of punishments.
•Food hall pass to avoid sensory overload
None of these things cost money. They just require willingness and consistency. I feel we could prevent EBSA a lot more if schools acted earlier, cared deeply, and stopped treating flexibility like a privilege.
Tribunal are seeing this pattern more and more…. Schools refusing to act. Doing nothing. Passing the problem back to parents and ultimately teens unable to attend.
I recently won a refusal to issue appeal for my own child, not because her needs weren’t clear because they were, but because the school failed to implement reasonable adjustments or any support from professional reports which resulted in EBSA.
Let that sink in
These are extracts from my child’s Tribunal order from the judge when they ordered an EHCP because they didn’t feel she would get help without one.
(shared with my permission)
“The Tribunal has very real concerns about the degree to which the school has fully understood the range of ###XX’s SEN, and that appears to be reflected in the limited SEP in the available evidence.”
That concern has not been addressed at all by the LA. According to the LA, ###X is working at expected or above progress in all subjects. That is clearly contradicted by the substantive evidence, and indicates a failure to appreciate the extent of ###X’s need. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the school was addressing or implementing recommendations from reports”
“Regrettably, the failure to systematically track and review SEN, academic achievement, and progress is a consistent theme here.”
“Another example that gave the Tribunal real concern was the approach to ###XXs mental health . It was deeply alarming that this X year old was refused access to the school counsellor”
“There was nothing to indicate the steps being taken to try to facilitate ###XX’s attendance, bearing in mind its importance to her and the Parent raising sensory needs in this appeal.”
“For completeness, the Tribunal also considered whether ###XX’s SEN will be met, and whether any reasonably required SEP will be made available, without an EHC Plan (see, for example, JP v Sefton MBC [2017] UKUT 0364). As observed by the UT at para.41 of SS and MS v Worcestershire CC [2016] UKUT 267, an EHC Plan generates certainty of, and a significant degree of stability in, educational provision.
The Tribunal took into account the failures to fully address the recommendations in the specialist reports, and what the Parent has said about the school not implementing reasonable adjustments. Ultimately, the evidence did not demonstrate, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that the required SEP would be delivered without an EHC Plan. It is ordered that a EHC plan is to be issued for ###XX.”
Of course the LA wrote a big fat pile of s**t and I have a content appeal in March but it’s one climb up the ladder.
Why this matters
We are seeing a dangerous pattern:
• Schools saying “we’ve tried everything” when they haven’t (and they cannot evidence this)
• Reasonable adjustments not implemented
• Specialist advice ignored
• Difficulties escalating into EBSA
• And then those same failures being used to argue against assessment
That is not lawful and Tribunal are increasingly calling it out.
X###
