Do we have an example for your situation?

[CHILD] has been receiving SEN Support since Year 1, when the school's SENCO first identified that he was falling significantly behind in literacy and language development. He is now in Year 3 and, despite two and a half years of SEN Support including group reading sessions, a weekly SALT referral, and daily reading practice with a teaching assistant, the gap between [CHILD] and his peers continues to widen. This section sets out the specific reasons why we believe a statutory EHC needs assessment should be considered.

Since September 2022, [CHILD] has received a range of interventions and targeted support through SEN Support. These have included a small group phonics programme delivered three times per week, fifteen minutes of daily one-to-one reading support with a teaching assistant, and three SALT sessions per term through the school's visiting service. We are grateful for the school's commitment to [CHILD], and we recognise the effort that has gone into putting these measures in place.

The most recent school assessment data from March 2025 shows that [CHILD] is working at a level approximately three years below his chronological age in reading and writing, and at least two years below in spoken language and verbal comprehension. According to the school's own progress records shared at the January 2025 SEN review, the gap has not closed since September 2022 — in several areas it has widened. The SENCO acknowledged at the January review that the interventions currently available to the school are 'at their limit' in terms of what can be expected to make a meaningful difference, and noted in writing that she would support a request for a statutory assessment.

At home, the impact of these persistent difficulties is visible every day. [CHILD] finds reading homework distressing and frequently becomes frustrated or upset within minutes of starting. He cannot read a simple sentence from his school reader without sounding out almost every word, including words he has encountered many times before. When asked to produce written work — even a short paragraph — he often sits for 20 to 30 minutes and produces only a few words. The gap between his effort and his output is clearly affecting his confidence and his sense of himself as a learner.

A Speech and Language Therapy assessment was carried out in November 2024 by [PROFESSIONAL], a qualified SALT at [LOCAL_AUTHORITY] CAMHS. The assessment found that [CHILD]'s receptive language — his ability to understand spoken language — places him at the 3rd percentile for his age. His expressive language scores were similarly significantly below age-expected levels. The report notes that [CHILD] 'demonstrates marked difficulty processing verbal instructions of more than two steps' and frequently relies on contextual cues and peer behaviour rather than comprehension of what has been said. The SALT report concluded that [CHILD] requires specialist speech and language intervention delivered by a qualified therapist at a level that cannot currently be provided within the school's SEN Support framework, and recommended that a statutory assessment should be considered.

An Educational Psychology assessment was completed in January 2025 by Dr [PROFESSIONAL]. Dr [PROFESSIONAL]'s report found that [CHILD]'s working memory is at the 4th percentile for his age, and that his processing speed is at the 6th percentile. These results indicate severe difficulties in the cognitive systems that underpin learning across all curriculum areas. Dr [PROFESSIONAL] specifically recommended that a statutory EHC needs assessment should be conducted, noting that [CHILD]'s needs 'appear to require a level of structured, consistent and specialist support that the current SEN Support framework may not be in a position to guarantee.' The EP report also recommended further assessment of [CHILD]'s attention, sensory processing, and social communication profile.

[CHILD]'s class teacher, Mrs [PROFESSIONAL], submitted a written contribution to the school's EHCP application evidence pack, in which she noted that [CHILD] 'requires a significantly higher level of adult input than any other child in the class to access even basic learning activities,' and that on days when the additional TA support is not available, he is frequently 'unable to access the curriculum independently and becomes visibly distressed.' This is consistent with what the professional reports have documented.

[CHILD]'s educational difficulties are having a measurable and growing impact on his emotional wellbeing, his sense of self-worth, and his engagement with school. He has said on multiple occasions that he feels 'stupid' compared to his classmates, and he has begun expressing reluctance to attend school on mornings when he knows there will be a reading or writing lesson. During the spring term, he refused to attend school on four separate occasions, and on two of those days became significantly distressed — with episodes lasting more than 45 minutes — before leaving the house.

These concerns have been raised with the school and with his GP. His GP referred [CHILD] to CAMHS for an emotional wellbeing assessment, and the family is currently waiting for an appointment. Without a formal plan specifying the support [CHILD] will receive, his growing anxiety around school is likely to worsen, particularly as he progresses into Year 4 and the academic demands increase further. The SEND Code of Practice at paragraph 9.14(g) asks whether a child's needs are affecting their physical or mental health — and the documented evidence clearly shows that they are.

The SENCO has been clear that the school is committed to supporting [CHILD], but she has also acknowledged — in writing, at the January 2025 SEN review — that the school cannot guarantee the level of specialist support that the professional assessments indicate he requires. The current SEN Support arrangements depend on the availability of TA time that varies week to week, a SALT visiting service providing three sessions per term (approximately two hours of direct input across 13 weeks), and phonics interventions designed for groups of four to six children.

Both the SALT report and the EP report have identified that [CHILD] needs more intensive, individual and specialist support than these arrangements provide. The SALT has specifically noted that group intervention is insufficient for [CHILD]'s level of need, and that individual specialist sessions are required. The EP has recommended a structured learning environment with daily adult support, access to a visual timetable, and consistent use of chunked instruction — none of which can currently be guaranteed under the school's existing SEN Support capacity.

Without a statutory framework that specifies what [CHILD] will receive, when, by whom, and to what standard, there is no mechanism for ensuring that the provision recommended by professionals is actually delivered. An EHCP would provide that framework and give [CHILD], the family, and the school a clear, enforceable plan. The evidence in this case — across educational, clinical, and parental sources — demonstrates that a statutory assessment is relevant and should be carried out.