# EHCP review: check the plan's wording in the review.

The review starts with whether the support is working. Alongside that, Sendix checks whether the plan is clear enough to deliver and review: it flags vague wording, shows the source behind each suggestion and leaves every decision to staff.

To see the evidence before the meeting, read how an [EHCP annual review](https://sendix.ai/annual-review.md) comes together.

## Worked example (a fictional plan)

**Fictional EHCP, A.M., Year 5: provision F2.**

- **Need (B3):** "A.M. experiences sensory overload in noisy environments. When overloaded, they can leave learning activities and require a predictable sensory regulation strategy to help them return to learning."
- **Outcome (E2):** "By the end of Year 6, A.M. will use an agreed sensory regulation strategy and return to a learning activity within ten minutes in four out of five recorded occasions."
- **Provision, as written (F2):** "A.M. will receive a 30-minute sensory regulation session once per week."
- **Finding:** who delivers it? The plan doesn't say, so the level of expertise is open (SEND Code of Practice 2015, table "What to include in each section of the EHC plan", Section F). Sendix won't guess: it asks for the occupational therapy assessment named in Section K.
- **Fix once that report is in the file:** "A.M. will receive a 30-minute sensory regulation session once per week, delivered by an HCPC-registered occupational therapist, as the occupational therapy assessment recommends, with a written programme that class staff follow between sessions." Staff accept, edit or reject it.

## What does Sendix check in an EHCP?

It reads the plan and the file behind it: the reports, the child's views and the review history.

- **Section E outcomes.** Whether each outcome describes what the child will be able to do, not the service they'll get, and is specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound, with a starting point and a date to review it against.
- **Section F provision.** Wording such as "as required" or "appropriate" that leaves the type, hours, frequency or level of expertise open, so nobody can tell what is owed or whether it happened.
- **The thread from need to provision.** Each provision is read with the need in Section B and the outcome in Section E it serves, so a flag shows where the thread comes loose.
- **The evidence for a fix.** A rewrite is drafted only from evidence already in the file. Where the evidence isn't there, Sendix names the report it needs instead of guessing.

## What is each flag based on?

Every finding names its basis and links to the source. The SEND Code's "must" is a legal requirement; its "should" means the guidance must be considered and any departure explained. Some checks, such as whether an outcome has a starting point, are Sendix's own and are labelled that way.

- Law: [Children and Families Act 2014, section 37(2)](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/section/37). An EHC plan specifies the child's special educational needs, the outcomes sought for them and the special educational provision they require.
- Law: [Children and Families Act 2014, section 42(2) and (6)](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/section/42). The local authority must secure the specified special educational provision, and "specified" means specified in the plan.
- Law: [Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014, regulation 12](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1530/regulation/12). The plan sets out the outcomes in section E and the special educational provision in section F, and each section must be separately identified.
- Statutory guidance: [SEND Code of Practice 2015, paragraphs 9.61 and 9.66](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7dcb85ed915d2ac884d995/SEND_Code_of_Practice_January_2015.pdf). Outcomes should be SMART. An outcome is "the benefit or difference made to an individual as a result of an intervention", not a description of the service.
- Statutory guidance: [SEND Code of Practice 2015, table "What to include in each section of the EHC plan", Section F](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7dcb85ed915d2ac884d995/SEND_Code_of_Practice_January_2015.pdf). Provision "must be detailed and specific and should normally be quantified, for example, in terms of the type, hours and frequency of support and level of expertise".
- Law: [Children and Families Act 2014, section 44(1)](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/section/44). The local authority must review the plan within 12 months of making it, and then within 12 months of each review.

## What do I take to the council?

- **A tracked-changes document in Word.** Staff decide which wording suggestions become recommendations in the review report.
- **Your recommendations, with their basis.** After an annual review, the school's report must set out recommendations on any amendments required to the plan (SEND Code of Practice, paragraph 9.176). Each change you send carries the rule and the evidence behind it.
- **The plan stays in force meanwhile.** Only the council can amend an EHCP, and it consults the family first (SEND Code of Practice, paragraphs 9.193 to 9.198). Until it does, staff keep delivering the provision as written.

## Read next

- [EHCP annual review](https://sendix.ai/annual-review.md)
- [How to check an EHCP against the law and the Code: a SENCO's checklist](https://sendix.ai/guides/how-to-check-an-ehcp-is-legally-compliant.md)
- [Getting Section F specific: provision that can be delivered and checked](https://sendix.ai/guides/getting-section-f-specific.md)
- [What makes an EHCP outcome measurable](https://sendix.ai/guides/what-makes-an-ehcp-outcome-measurable.md)
- [How pricing works](https://sendix.ai/pricing.md)
- [Data protection answers for your DPO](https://sendix.ai/data-protection.md)

## Next step

Book a 30-minute walkthrough with Marcus Kamuntu, founder, on a fictional plan (no pupil data, nothing to sign): https://cal.com/sendix/30min