Portsmouth Local SEND Reform Plan 2026

Annex A: Local SEND Reform Plan

Developing a Local SEND Reform Plan is an important first step for local areas to set out how they will lay the foundation for reform, and design an approach tailored to their local context. A shared plan which focuses on co-designing the local approach as system partners and with children, young people and families will help foster collective responsibility for delivering the reforms.

It is critical that all system partners, including health, education and childcare settings, work together to design and deliver the Local SEND Reform Plan, under the local authority’s leadership. It is also crucial that representative family carers e.g. the local Parent Carer Forum, are involved in the development of the plan.

The expectation is that this plan is discussed, agreed, and signed off at your relevant SEND Governance Board. As a minimum, the plan must be formally signed off by the Local Authority Chief Executive (CEO), the Integrated Care Board (ICB) Chief Executive, the Local Authority Director of Children’s Service (DCS), the Integrated Care Board NHS Place Director, and the Local Authority Chief Financial Officer (CFO/Section 151 Officer). We encourage other colleagues and partners who have contributed to also review and sign-off the plan, particularly early years, school, college and trust leaders.

Name of Local Authority: Portsmouth

Name of Integrated Care Board: HIOW

Local SEND Reform Plan SRO: Nathan Caine

Signatories

Role Name Signature Email contact Date

Natalie.Brahma- 17 June

LA Ceo Natalie Brahma-Pearl

Pearl@portsmouthcc.gov.uk

NHS

Hampshire and

18 June

Isle of Wight

Maggie MacIsaac

maggie.macisaac@nhs.net

ICB – Chief

Executive

15 June

LA DCS Sarah Daly

Sarah.Daly@portsmouthcc.gov.uk

LA CFO (s151

17 June

Chris Ward

Chris.Ward@portsmouthcc.gov.uk

Officer)

Leader of the

16 June

Cllr Steve Pitt

Cllr.Steve.Pitt@portsmouthcc.gov.uk

Council

Executive Summary

A brief summary of your local system ‘change story’ – your local context, where you are now, where you want to get to in the next 3 years, how you know you are succeeding and how you will know you have achieved your vision for the next 3 years. Please include a brief qualitative summary. This summary should also include your assessment of current and forecast performance against the headline metrics.

Please structure your ‘change story’ using the following aims:

• Build a 0-25 system where children and young people receive support to achieve and thrive through (a) more inclusive settings and
• stronger local partnerships
• Improve capacity and capability of the mainstream and specialist workforce to identify and meet need
• Improve confidence of children, families, and stakeholders in reform and readiness of the system
• Stabilise finances and improve value for money

.

Local context

Portsmouth is a small, densely populated urban authority with limited scope for physical expansion and high levels of deprivation; over a third of pupils are eligible for free school meals. SEND need is identified early and is increasingly complex, with 43% of EHCPs issued for children under 10. This places sustained pressure on early years, health, assessment and family support services, reinforcing the need for a preventative, inclusive, mainstream-led system rather than reliance on specialist or out-of-area provision.

The city benefits from strong foundations, including a mature SEND and Alternative Provision (SENDAP) partnership established in 2003, a consistent focus on relational and restorative practice across schools, and a track record of innovation through the DfE SENDAP Change Programme. These strengths shape both our ambition and approach to reform.

Where we are now Portsmouth’s system is inclusive in principle but variable in practice and outcomes. Most children and young people with SEND are educated locally, reliance on independent non-maintained special schools is low, and almost all pupils with EHCPs have a school place. Early years outcomes compare well to national averages, and exclusion rates for pupils with EHCPs are low. However, demand for EHCPs has risen significantly, particularly in early years, placing pressure on workforce capacity and statutory processes. Attendance, attainment and progression remain weaker for pupils on SEN Support, particularly at secondary and post-16 phases, alongside persistent and severe absence.

Where we want to be by 2028/29 By 2028/29, Portsmouth will deliver a mainstream-led, inclusive and financially sustainable 0–25 system. Needs will be identified and met earlier, reducing reliance on statutory processes, with EHCPs providing clarity and value rather than acting as gateways to support. Our reform priorities are:

• Inclusive settings and partnerships – Inclusion embedded across all phases, with Ordinarily Available Provision, school clusters, early years and Experts at Hand operating as business as usual.
• Workforce capacity and capability – A confident, skilled workforce supported by a shared competencies framework, coordinated training, supervision and better deployment of specialist expertise.
• Confidence in the system – Clearer pathways to support, earlier intervention and consistent decision-making, reducing EHCNA requests and improving experiences for those on SEN Support.
• Financial sustainability – Early intervention reducing escalation into high-cost provision, improving predictability and sustainability of the High Needs Block.
• Belonging and achievement – Improved attendance, engagement and attainment, with reduced reliance on statutory intervention through effective early support.

How we will know we are succeeding

Success will be evidenced through improved attendance and reduced severe absence for children with SEND; sustained EHCP timeliness and quality; reduced reliance on independent placements; stronger outcomes at secondary and post-16 (including reduced NEET); fewer EHCNA requests for under-5s; and a more stable High Needs Block.

Families will report earlier support and fewer crises, schools will demonstrate increased confidence and shared responsibility, professionals will experience stronger multi-agency working, and children and young people will attend, belong and achieve within their local communities.

Section 1 – Vision and Goals

• What the local area partnership is trying to achieve?

Please set out your goals for your local system. These should be clear, aligned to the vision set out in the Schools White Paper, small in number and measurable. These goals should include clear reference to:

• Outcomes for children
• Confidence of parents, carers and young people in the system
• Management of finances to secure value for money

Portsmouth’s vision is for a mainstream-led, inclusive and sustainable SEND system where children and young people’s needs are identified early, met effectively, and supported close to home so they can thrive in education, family life and their communities. Support will be needs-led rather than plan-led, with co-production embedded across services and the SENDAP partnership.

Aligned with DfE SEND and AP reforms, we are shifting from reactive statutory responses to preventative, integrated support. We will continue embedding the Local Inclusion Support Offer, ordinarily available provision and effective transitions so that most needs are met without escalation, while maintaining timely, high-quality EHCP processes where required.

By 2027/28, we aim to improve attendance, engagement and outcomes for children with SEND, particularly in secondary and post-16 phases; strengthen confidence and consistency in SEN Support across all settings; and sustain low reliance on independent and out-of-area provision, keeping children connected to Portsmouth. We will maintain strong EHCP timeliness and quality while improving impact and strengthen workforce capability through a shared competencies framework across education, health and care. A key priority is preparing young people for adulthood, improving transitions, employability and independence.

Progress will be evidenced through improved attendance (including reduced severe absence), fewer EHC needs assessments and EHCPs for under-5s, increased confidence in mainstream provision, sustained inclusion in local settings, high-performing statutory processes with low tribunal rates, and a reduction in young people with EHCPs who are not in education, employment or training (NEET)

Section 2 – Strategy

• Where the local area partnership expects to be in the next 3 years

A description of what your local system would look like in the next 3 years in line with the national vision set out in the Schools White Paper and set within the context of where you are starting from as a local system.

In particular, as commissioning system partners, you should reflect on and agree what your fully fledged Experts At Hand Offer model should be and how this will be deployed via mainstream settings and providers (including those not based in your area – e.g. further education colleges attended by your young people) to build their capacity as well as identify and meet the needs of children and young people earlier and without the need for a statutory assessment for Education, Health and Care.

To help you fully consider the scope and scale of change required, you may find it useful to structure your response using these 4 building blocks of an inclusive system, reflecting on what is working well in your system, what you are most worried about, what needs to change, and how the enablers will help you achieve your 3 year vision.

When summarising where your local area partnership currently is, please include an assessment of where you are in reference to the core minimum requirements above and how you bridge the gap, making reference to and attaching additional documents that provide underlying evidence for your summary.

System leadership, local partnership collaboration and co-production

Portsmouth continues to place a higher proportion of children with EHCPs in mainstream and local provision and has significantly lower reliance on independent and non-maintained special schools than seen nationally. This reflects long-term sufficiency planning, strong partnership commissioning and sustained investment in local capacity. What is working well

Special school and Inclusion Centre sufficiency has historically been well planned, with expansions and new local provision mitigating demand pressure and reducing out-of-city placements.

Integrated commissioning and multi-agency panels support timely access to specialist input around schools, AP and high-need placements.

Targeted investment in Inclusion Units, Tier 2 and Tier 3 provision (Portsmouth's 4 Tier model) allows children with more complex needs to be supported locally at lower cost, reducing escalation to specialist or independent provision.

Strong and effective secondary AP networks are in place at a strategic and operational level, that are improving the quality of internal Additional Provision.

Strong quality assurance and commissioning frameworks for Alternative Provision and specialist placements underpin confidence in local pathways.

specialist input is required. Going forward, LISO and school/ EY cluster partnerships will:

• act as the primary route for accessing specialist advice, enabling consistent decision-making before statutory escalation
• support time-limited, outcomes-focused use of specialist provision, with clearer expectations for review and de-escalation
• inform sufficiency and commissioning decisions using system-wide data on impact and demand and
• help rebalance the system towards enhanced mainstream and community-based provision, particularly in Early Years and secondary phases.

In this way, the Experts at Hand model underpins a sustainable SEND system where specialist support is accessible, targeted and locally anchored, improving outcomes for children while reducing reliance on high-cost placements. A significant proportion of our primary schools have set up "ad hoc" additional provision to meet the needs of some of their current cohorts. Many of these have been supported through Inclusion Capital Grants. Over the next three years we will work with schools to review the effectives and outcomes of the current provisions, including the effective use of resources. We will use the Experts at Hand to provide guidance and support to ensure the quality of these provisions. We will work across the partnership and clusters to ensure a strategic and planned approach to Support Bases across all phases and areas. We are increasing our use of Inclusion Capital Grants to develop additional support bases as well out plans for increased specialist bases. We are beginning a consultation process with our Multi Academy Trust and head teachers to explore the ways that we can work with them to consider the impact of falling roles and the opportunities that this creates to provide additional inclusion bases and support bases. System Leadership, Local Partnership Collaboration and Co-production Portsmouth’s system leadership is moving from mature partnership arrangements to a more explicitly delivery-driven, outcomes-focused model, capable of sustaining improvement under increasing demand and financial pressure. Strong trust, shared history and collaborative governance remain key strengths; the next phase is about using these assets to drive sharper system-wide consistency.

What needs to change

Rising demand, particularly from Early Years, is now saturating local specialist capacity and is creating upward pressure into special schools and the independent sector.

There is a growing need to de-escalate placements, strengthen reintegration pathways and more clearly align specialist provision to time-limited, outcomes-focused support.

Future sufficiency planning must shift further towards enhanced mainstream and community-based provision, alongside clearer decision-making at assessment and placement gateways.

To remain sustainable, access to specialist provision must be consistently aligned to system principles, funding decisions and improved use of data on impact and outcomes.

Increase the attendance and outcomes for children and young people accessing Teir 4 AP System Leadership, Partnership Collaboration and Co-production: Portsmouth benefits from strong, mature system leadership and long-standing partnership arrangements across education, health, care and the voluntary sector. The SENDAP Partnership is well-established, with clear governance, shared priorities and active involvement from senior leaders, schools and parents. This has enabled coherent strategic planning, robust commissioning and a shared commitment to inclusion, early intervention and local provision.

Encouraging inclusive culture and behaviours The maturity assessment places Portsmouth as maturing in leadership and governance, with high levels of trust and collaboration underpinning improvement activity. What is working well

Leadership across the local authority, schools and health partners is broadly aligned around shared system goals, including mainstream inclusion, raising aspirations and improving outcomes.

Decision-making structures are well understood, supported by transparent performance oversight and regular engagement through the SENDAP Board, Portsmouth Education Partnership (PEP) and Schools’ Forum.

Co-production with parents, carers and young people is a clear strength, with an active Parent Carer Forum and established engagement of young people with SEND through Dynamite, shaping strategy, service design and improvement priorities.

Leadership across education, health and care is increasingly aligned around a shared narrative: early intervention, mainstream inclusion and sustainability are inseparable. The work around the High Needs Block reinforces this, positioning partnership leadership as the mechanism through which difficult trade-offs are made transparently and collectively, rather than through short-term or siloed decisions. Co-production is evolving from strong engagement to systematic influence. Parents, carers and young people will increasingly shape priorities, design, assurance and evaluation—particularly for SEN Support, Early Years and post-16 pathways—so that lived experience informs not just services, but how the system allocates resources and judges success. Going forward, Portsmouth will:

• strengthen the link between strategy, lived experience, performance and financial decisions
• use partnership boards and forums to drive system accountability, not just coordination and
• embed co-production as a routine way of working across all reform priorities.
• ongoing coproduction with Portsmouth Parent Voice (PCF) to shape SEND Reform Plans and the Experts at Hand Offer.

Together, this positions the partnership to lead reform with confidence, coherence and credibility. Encouraging Inclusive Cultures and Behaviours Portsmouth’s direction of travel is to move from a strong but variable inclusive culture to one that is consistently embedded, system-led and resilient under pressure. The foundations are well established through restorative and relational practice, Ordinarily Available Provision and a shared commitment to inclusion across schools and partners. The next phase focuses on ensuring that inclusive behaviours are experienced consistently by all children and young people, regardless of setting, phase or level of need. Central to this shift is strengthening system accountability for inclusion, so that inclusive cultures are not reliant on individual leadership or goodwill

o

This collaborative culture has enabled Portsmouth to sustain investment in early intervention and local capacity longer than many areas, mitigating cost pressures. What needs to change

As demand and financial pressures increase, leadership must continue to shift from project-based improvement to whole-system delivery, ensuring consistency across all services and phases.

Co-production, while strong, needs to be more systematically embedded and outcome-focused, particularly for children on SEN Support and in Early Years and post-16 pathways.

To sustain confidence and trust, partnership leadership must continue to strengthen the link between strategic decisions, lived experience, measurable impact and financial sustainability, particularly through delivery of the HNB recovery priorities.

Academic outcomes for children and young people, especially those on SEN support are below national levels and those of our statistical neighbours. This limits some of the opportunities for our young people and needs to improve. Encouraging Inclusive Culture and Behaviours: Portsmouth has a strong and increasingly coherent inclusive culture across education settings, underpinned by a shared commitment to relational, restorative and needs-led practice. Inclusive values are clearly articulated within the SENDAP Strategy and are embedded through system leadership, partnership governance and sustained engagement with schools. The SEF and maturity matrix highlight inclusion as a cultural strength, with leadership behaviour, trust and collaboration enabling schools to retain responsibility for children with SEND and work proactively with partners rather than defaulting to exclusion or escalation.

• What is the local area partnership’s strategy for delivering on the above?

A brief summary of your local system’s theory of change or reform strategy. Reflect on the output of your Local Partnership Maturity Assessment Tool, particularly your Local System ‘change story.’

See attachment - Q 3. Theory of Change

• Please upload a completed copy of the Local Partnership Maturity Assessment Tool.

See attachment Q 4.The Local Partnership Maturity Assessment Tool

• What is the local area partnership roadmap for the next 3 years?

Reflecting on the broad timescales and expectation for deliverables set out in the Schools White Paper, key documents and core minimum requirements set out in this document, please provide a high-level roadmap for the next 3 years. Please highlight key milestones and a trajectory to the target metrics identified above, including leading indicators.

In the 2026-27 column, in particular, please reference how you plan to meet the core minimum requirements in your narrative, including details and evidence in supporting documents.

You can insert or upload supporting documents including graphics/visuals that illustrate your data trajectory.

• Inclusion Outreach Service (incorporating high-quality specialist providers)
• NHS Therapy Mentor Core Team (adding value to NHS core service)

Aligning with:

• ELSEC
• MHST
• ND in Schools
• Family Hubs

Strengthen multi-agency working via the Inclusion Hub / Experts at Hand:

• Clarify roles, thresholds and access routes
• Establish a single, consolidated SEND dataset to understand:
• SaLTA model into primary schools, extending the impact of ELSEC into KS1 and 2
• Establish EY

Clusters: Establish EY Clusters groups, building on the evaluation of school clusters and aligned with Best Start Inclusion Practitioners and Family Hubs.

• Early intervention

and non-statutory support

Embed the expectations of Ordinarily Available Provision (Ey–Fe), aligned with Inclusion Standards to ensure clarity, consistency and confidence in mainstream expectations.

Embed ISP as a core early-intervention tool to reduce unnecessary EHCNAs.

Refine and increase the offer from Experts

Assured inclusive practice

Maintain consistent application of Inclusion Vision and OAP across schools and settings.

Evidence improved outcomes in attendance, belonging and placement stability. Mature system working

Locality clusters, Inclusion Hub and multi-agency pathways operate as business-as-usual.

Commissioning decisions fully informed by shared SEND intelligence. Financial sustainability

Demonstrate:

o levels and areas of need, o demand pressures, o escalation points, o impact of SENDIF+ and other

early funding. Following consultation with Schools, Colleges and EY settings the Experts at Hand offer in Portsmouth will have a strong focus on training, supervision and ongoing workforce development.

• Establish school Clusters:

Establish school Clusters groups, with explicit links and relationships with locality working and the Family Hubs. Experts at Hand will be embedded in the clusters. Pending government guidance on school groups and pooled funding, develop an agreed and transparent way of working in clusters and allocating cluster level resources. This will

o reduced High Needs Block volatility, o cost avoidance through early intervention, o transparent and defensible ensure that support is not disproportionately accessed by the most proactive schools. Clusters will review and strengthen existing transition arrangements and information sharing between settings. Plan for establishment of Early Years Clusters, ensure clear alignment with BSiL and the role of Best Start Inclusion Practitioners.

• Leadership, Culture and Ethos:

Supporting early identification, demand management and pathways

Continue to develop and extend work with school and system leaders to strengthen inclusive culture and leadership through continued investment in relational and restorative practice.

Clarify the expectations of Ordinarily Available Provision (Ey–Fe), aligned with Inclusion Standards to ensure clarity, consistency and confidence in mainstream expectations.

Plan sustainable workforce development model to cascade, maintain and embed relational and restorative culture and ethos.

Working hand in glove with the Support Hub (Developing through Families First) and neighbourhood locality partnerships (incorporating Family Hubs). Strengthen preventative messaging to: at Hand / Inclusion Hub using data on demand and impact.

• Implement aligned EY, Year R and school funding and referral models, supporting earlier access to support.
• Strengthen tier 2 AP alignment, reducing escalation to specialist and higher-cost provision.
• Embed the citywide transition framework across education phases.

funding decisions.

Shift focus from recovery to continuous improvement and assurance. Capital work

Continue to expand specialist and support bases

• Place-based working

Review Locality SEND Clusters and scale where impact is evidenced.

Strengthen peer support, SENCo networks and shared commissioning intelligence.

• Cost, commissioning

and value for money

Implement revised funding bandings and processes.

o early years settings, schools and colleges o parents/carers o professionals (reducing default

Embed exceptional funding governance and auditing.

Strengthen post-16 SEND decision-making, funding controls and progression pathways.

Improve HNB forecasting accuracy using consolidated intelligence.

• Capital work:

Further expand Inclusion Capital Grants to develop additional support bases in schools and EY settings.

Complete building work on agreed specialist base at ALNS secondary school.

Develop further specialist and support bases with schools and settings as identified by school clusters with school clusters to ensure all clusters have sufficient access to support bases.

reliance on EHCNAs in the early years sector).

Develop systems and pathways, including use of universal screening to:

o provide early and proactive intervention o prevent needs becoming barriers when earliest inversion will support this o reduce escalation of needs o ensure more complex needs are identified with plans in place to meet these.

Pending Government guidance on Inclusion Support Plans (ISP), co-produce, pilot and trial ISPs at transition points, beginning with starting school.

o trial in selected settings and at transition points, o develop clear parent-and professional-facing guidance, o begin collecting early impact evidence.

• Co-production, inclusion and mainstream

capacity

Begin addressing systemic and attitudinal barriers to inclusion (language, curriculum flexibility, belonging).

Embed restorative and relational practice in settings and with parents, carers and pupils.

Redesign a coproduction strategy that works proactively with parents/ carers and children and young people at operational and strategic levels.

Actively engage with the PCF in reviewing and developing our plans.

Further strengthen parent hub: proving feedback at a setting and systemic level to shape the offer and the plans.

• Sufficiency: Cost control and financial

management

Begin review of:

Continue planned work in special schools, completing work at the Omega Centre.

o top-up bandings and funding consistency, o SLAs and MOUs, o cost escalation drivers.

Review "Backpack" placements to learn from where these have been successful, providing resources and support for more specialist places within mainstreams schools and support bases.

Improve transparency and assurance for schools and providers.

Strengthen brokering processes for high-cost placements.

Develop a system-managed exceptional funding mechanism.

Maximise efficient use of resources by incorporating AI to support drafting statutory plans.

Review and evaluate the effectiveness of the Assistive Technology Lending Library Pilot and consider the future and potential expansion of this.

• Capital work:

Expand Inclusion Capital Grants to develop additional support bases in schools and EY settings.

Complete primary specialist base at St. George's Benefifical Primary School.

Begin building work on agreed specialist base at ALNS secondary school.

Scope options for further specialist and support bases with schools and settings.

Align planning with school clusters to ensure all clusters have sufficient access to support bases.

Continue planned work in special schools, completing work at Cliffdale Primary Academy and continuing work at the Omega Centre.

• Review of Support Bases (Tier 2 AP) in

Primary and Secondary Schools to establish expected practice and identify best practice

Identify existing tier 2 internal AP in the primary phase, and further develop this provision, while strengthening tier 2 provision across all secondary schools.

Conduct a full audit of primary schools and local authority education teams to identify the tier 2 AP currently being delivered, including the number of children supported, the needs being met, and the support schools receive to deliver tier 2 AP.

Extend engagement with MATs and Head Teachers about using surplus places to

create/ expand Support Bases and Specialist Bases.

• Establish a Preparing for Adulthood Hub

(age 14-25)

Bring together a partnership of education, health, social care, and employment specialists.

Develop a strategic narrative: the best PfA work starts alongside childhood.

Operate as a single point of access for families and professionals.

Provide advice, guidance, workshops, and co-production forums.

Oversee consistent implementation of PfA reviews.

Support SENCOs in Year 11 annual reviews (AY 26/27).

• Transition: pathways and navigation

Map and clarify identification, funding and referral pathways across EY, Year R and schools.

Establish transition working groups:

o define expected vs best practice, o strengthen information-sharing

arrangements, o capture parent voice and early case

studies. Success measures Drawing on metrics from the accompanying data template E.g.

Early intervention in place

Consistent inclusion language emerging

Increased capacity and confidence in mainstream schools to meet more complex

Reduced escalation and clearer thresholds

Inclusive mainstream established as default

Early help embedded and trusted

Improve attendance of pupils in all maintained schools (mainstream and special) with SEN Reduce spend on ISS places Increase # children and young people supported by Education Psychologists/Salt/Ot in maintained provision Improve overall effectiveness of provision NEET data Leading indicators

• Increased access to specialist advice and support to implement the advice given,
• Clearer pathways and thresholds
• Stronger spend governance underpinning reform

Evidenced though: Increased access to EP advice and Experts at Hand in mainstream provisions. Reduction in ENCNAs from schools

• Improved school confidence and consistency
• Better alignment between funding, inclusion and need
• Improved predictability of SEND expenditure

Evidenced though: Reduction in ENCNAs from parents and settings. Increased capacity in support bases and specialist bases

• SEND spend stabilised and defensible
• System able to self-evaluate and improve

Evidenced though: Increased confidence of schools and settings in meeting needs.

• What will the local area partnership deliver in the first year?

Please outline the key workstreams, milestones and trajectory your local area partnership will deliver and achieve in 2026-27 as well as how you plan to spend the investment allocation that will help fund this year’s delivery. Please share key milestones and anticipated dates, success measures, cost breakdown and category. These should incorporate the core minimum requirements, be mapped to the building blocks above and should reflect a more detailed trajectory to the narrative, milestones and target metrics outlined in the 2026- 27 column above.

• Receiving settings give clear messages that they can meet the needs of allocated children.
• Leadership, Culture, Early Identification &

Pathways Outcome A consistent inclusive culture is established, with strong early identification systems and clear pathways reducing unnecessary escalation. The work on SEND reforms is explicitly aligned with the ongoing Relational and Restorative Practice workstream Success Measures

• Clear Ordinarily Available Provision expectations implemented
• Increased use of early intervention pathways vs statutory routes
• Reduction in inappropriate or premature EHCNA requests
• Positive feedback from schools and parents on clarity of pathways
• Co-production, Inclusion & Mainstream Capacity

Outcome Stronger partnership with parents, carers and young people leads to improved inclusion, belonging and trust in mainstream provision. Success Measures

• New co-production strategy implemented
• Increased parent/carer participation in system design
• Evidence of improved inclusion language and practice across settings
• Feedback reflects improved trust and understanding

Inclusion Adviser with RP in schools implementatio n lead Service manager participation

Define and communicate OAP expectations (Ey– Fe) Develop early identification framework and screening approach Co-design Inclusion Support Plans (ISP) for pilot Review barriers to inclusion (language, curriculum, belonging) Co-design refreshed co- production strategy Align approach with relational practice

Updated OAP in place and understood by settings and schools Increase in the proportion of senior leaders participating in RRP CPD. Reduction in EHCNA from EY settings Baseline feedback from parent hubs established

Pilot universal screening and early intervention pathways Trial ISPs at transition points (starting school) Launch consistent messaging to schools, parents and professionals Launch co- production forums (strategic and operational) Embed restorative approaches Develop tools/resources to support inclusive practice

ISP used for most children on SEN Support at Transition Points. Starting school and year 6/7 Increase in the proportion of middle leaders and school staff participating in RRP CPD. Clear communication strategy in place, coproduced with parents and carers.

Evaluate ISP pilot and produce guidance Refine early pathways using data and feedback Embed workforce development model for relational/restorativ e practice. Evaluate impact through parent/carer and CYP feedback Refine approach and scale across wider system Publish shared inclusion principles

Increase in the proportion of middle leaders and school staff participating in RRP CPD. Feedback from parent hubs demonstrates confidence in mainstream schools meeting needs Improvement from baseline feedback from parent hubs.

• Sufficiency, Cost Control & Financial

Governance Outcome Stronger financial governance reduces cost escalation and improves confidence in funding decisions. Success Measures

• Transparent and consistent funding systems in place
• Reduced reliance on high-cost placements
• Clear audit trail and improved provider confidence
• Capital Programme & Sufficiency of Places

Outcome Increased sufficiency of local specialist and support provision maintains low level of out-of-area placements. Success Measures

• Additional support bases in development/operation
• Improved geographical equity of provision
• Pupils supported locally
• Tier 2 AP (Support Bases Review)

Outcome Tier 2 provision is consistent, preventative and clearly understood across all phases. Success Measures

• Clear model of Tier 2 AP agreed
• Increased consistency across schools
• Reduced escalation to specialist provision

Head of Sufficiency with Head of Inclusion Head of Sufficiency AP Commissionin g Manager

Review bandings, SLAs, MOUs and cost drivers Audit Backpack placements and success factors Design exceptional funding framework Consult with schools and trusts about use of surplus space due to falling roles Confirm pipeline of support bases and capital projects Align with cluster needs and sufficiency gaps Complete audit of current Tier 2 AP provision Identify gaps and variation across phases

Evaluation of funding review shared with schools Space for additional support bases and specialist bases identified. Primary Network established

Strengthen brokerage and decision-making processes Pilot AI-supported statutory drafting Improve transparency for schools. Complete St George’s Primary base Build at ALNS secondary base Progress additional capital projects Define expected vs best practice Engage MATs and schools in expansion opportunities

New banding and funding plans shared Additional support bases working towards increased capacity. Best practice model identified and shared.

Evaluate impact on cost and demand Refine governance and assurance processes Embed system- managed funding approach Assess impact on sufficiency and demand Refine future capital planning Align with cluster development Begin implementation in priority areas Monitor impact on escalation and outcomes

Schools confirm banding and funding levels are supporting placements. Additional spaces available for the start of the academic year. New bases work to agree framework and adhere to guidance. Reduction in NEET

• Preparing for Adulthood (PfA Hub)

Outcome A coordinated PfA offer improves preparation for adulthood outcomes from early stages. Success Measures

• PfA Hub operational as single point of access
• Increased consistency in PfA reviews
• Improved support for Year 11 transitions
• Transitions & Pathways

Outcome Clear, consistent pathways improve transitions and reduce duplication and confusion. Success Measures

• Published pathway framework (EY–school)
• Improved parent and practitioner understanding
• Stronger information sharing between settings

Participation and Progression service manager Inclusion Adviser

Establish partnership model and scope Define PfA narrative and pathways Support SENCo delivery of Year 11 reviews Review transition processes from summer 26 Establish transition working groups across phases

Year 11 ARs are high quality

Launch PfA Hub Provide guidance and workshops Pilot transition protocols Capture parent voice and early case studies

Transition plans and support identified prior to year end for all YP with SEND

Evaluate engagement and impact Robust transition plans in place for YP moving to Post 16 provision. Publish final pathways and guidance Embed consistent transition practice across system

Projected Investment Spend per quarter Coord and admin Head of transformation Project coordination Project support Finance Data Coproduction- additional capacity School partnership manager Portsmouth Parent Voice (Parent Hubs) Coordination and Admin 304,000 Experts at Hand EP time EMAS Specialist Teachers (Inclusion Advisers) x4 EY Outreach Officers MABS (Specialist Teachers) Play Therapies SAT Outreach ICB Central Therapies team ICB Cluster Therapies Pathways and progress adviser Cluster funding for EaH PfA Manger Experts and Hand 1,101,900 Total Spend ; 1,405,900

SEND Transformation LA funding 30,000 17,000 10,000 7,000 8,500 2,000 17,000 30,000 121,500 Experts at Hand 23,000 35,000 99,000 50,000 32,000 8,000 14,000 5,000 53,300 9,000 30,000 7,000 367,300

SEND Transformation LA funding 30,000 17,000 10,000 7,000 8,500 2,000 17,000 - 91,500 Experts at Hand 23,000 35,000 99,000 50,000 32,000 8,000 14,000 5,000 53,300 9,000 30,000 7,000 367,300

SEND Transformation LA funding 30,000 17,000 10,000 7,000 8,500 2,000 17,000 - 91,500 Experts at Hand 23,000 35,000 99,000 50,000 32,000 8,000 14,000 5,000 53,300 9,000 30,000 7,000 367,300

Attachment Q 6 - EaH narrative

• How will the local area partnership deliver the first-year plan?

Please set out how you will ensure the required capacity and capability is in place from organisational corporate functions to support implementation of the plan. This could include reference to how you plan to build or bring in project delivery capability to manage delivery against the plan, support prioritisation, and effective use of resources; and how you plan to build the capacity and capability in data and analytics to support effective tracking against the measures in the plan and reporting that informs decision making.

We have appointed a Transformation Lead who will have strategic oversight and coordination of plan in the first year and beyond. This role is at a senior level and will ensure alignment with other transformation workstreams, including families first and Best Start in Life.

The transformation lead will work in co-production across the strategic partnerships to lead the delivery of the vision.

The cluster model of working, through schools in this first year and extended to EY settings in the second year of delivery, will be led by a Cluster Manger who will work with school leaders, the Experts at Hand and the Transformation Lead, to codesign a model that works for Portmsouth and aligns with our MATs. .Dedicated data resource will form a key role in targeting resource for the EaH offer proactively. Additional project coordination and dedicated finance support will ensure that capacity and capability are in place to support implementation of the plan.

8. Other funding Local Authorities.

Block Transfers: If you have made a block transfer (Schools Block to High Needs Block) for 26-27, please set out how your plans for this funding align with the activities outlined above.

250 words N/A we have not made a block transfer for 26-27 Capital: We have announced at least £3 billion in high needs capital between 2026-27 and 2029-30 to support children and young people (CYP) with SEND, or those requiring alternative provision (AP). This funding is intended to support place delivery across the full 0-25 age range, including early years and post-16. We expect funding to support the following outcomes: a. Inclusion at the core of high needs sufficiency strategy, resulting in more children and young people with SEND accessing suitable places in mainstream settings, across all phases of education b. Every child or young person who needs a place in an inclusion base can access one c. Fewer children and young people with SEND needing to travel a long way to access a suitable placement d. Improved suitability of the mainstream estate to support children and young people with SEND, with adaptations to improve inclusivity and accessibility of the physical environment We also welcome innovative uses of high needs capital to drive inclusion, for example, investment in assistive technology for use in mainstream settings.

Please outline your strategy for how this funding will meet the outcomes above, with reference to the core minimum requirements and other workstreams in this reform plan where appropriate. We would like to see detail around your plans to increase capacity for inclusion bases (formerly known as SEN units, resourced provision and pupil support units – SU/RP/PSUs), such as schools, colleges or early years providers identified, engagement with relevant settings and trusts, and target cohort of needs.

If your plans include increases to places in special schools or specialist post-16 institutions, please include a clear rationale, showing the need that is being met, and why it cannot be met through other types of provision, such as inclusion bases.

If you are receiving additional capital funding to replace one or more planned special or AP free schools, please set out how this funding will meet need in your area, and plans for engaging relevant trusts in your sufficiency planning.

N/A we are not receiving additional capital funding.

9. System partner and stakeholder engagement, and co-production.

Please outline how the local area partnership plans to engage system partners and stakeholders to develop and implement the plan – include planned engagement with schools and early years settings, alternative providers, FE and post-16 providers (including those your young people attend that are not within your local area), Parents and Carers and children and young people with SEND, with reference to the core minimum requirements. Consider changing roles and responsibilities in the context of the Schools White Paper and how you work collaboratively to manage the transition. Please indicate where additional support is required to engage partners or stakeholders - senior officials at the Department for Education will be available to contribute to summer term events with education leaders and parent carer forum leaders.

The local area partnership will engage system partners and stakeholders through a well-established multi-agency governance structure, ensuring that the SEND Reform Plan is co- produced, jointly owned and effectively implemented in line with the core minimum requirements.

At a strategic level, the SENDAP Board is the primary vehicle for partnership engagement and accountability. Its Terms of Reference set a clear expectation that all partners actively contribute to the design and delivery of the Local Area Inclusion Plan and are held to account for progress and outcomes. The Board brings together senior representatives from education, health, social care, the voluntary sector, and parent/carer forums, alongside representatives of children and young people, ensuring that the full system is engaged in both development and delivery.

Alongside this, the Portsmouth Education Partnership (PEP) Board provides the principal mechanism for engagement with education providers, including schools, multi-academy trusts, early years settings and post-16 providers. The PEP Board enables collective leadership for inclusion and aligns SEND reform priorities with wider school improvement activity, reflecting the evolving system leadership expectations set out in the Schools White Paper.

Engagement with schools is further strengthened through School Phase Boards and direct representation of headteachers and SENDCos across SENDAP governance structures. The Removing Barriers to Inclusion Group, a key sub-group of the SENDAP structure, focuses specifically on improving inclusive practice and ordinarily available provision across mainstream settings, ensuring that sector expertise informs delivery.

Early years settings are engaged through dedicated early years networks and representation within governance, ensuring a focus on early identification and intervention.

Engagement with FE and post-16 providers is delivered through the Preparing for Adulthood and P16 partnership structures and through representation within SENDAP governance, ensuring a consistent approach to transition and outcomes across the 0–25 system.

Co-production is central to the approach. Parents, carers, children and young people are engaged through established mechanisms including Portsmouth Parent Voice, the Parent Board, and participation groups such as Dynamite and Young Inspectors. These groups are embedded within governance arrangements and supported through regular engagement events, consultation activity and ongoing feedback mechanisms. This ensures that lived experience directly informs priorities, design and evaluation of the plan.

The partnership is also delivering targeted engagement activity, including workshops, consultation events and sector briefings, to support collective ownership of the reform programme. There is a clear commitment to structured engagement across the summer term, providing opportunities for partners to shape implementation and for national policy to be communicated clearly.

In line with the Schools White Paper, the partnership recognises the changing roles of local authorities and trusts. The local authority is transitioning towards a strategic commissioning, assurance and convening role, while schools and trusts are increasingly responsible for leading inclusion within their systems. This transition will be managed through strengthened joint accountability arrangements across the SENDAP and PEP Boards, clear expectations on partners, and alignment of SEND priorities within school-led improvement structures.

Overall, this approach ensures that engagement is systematic, inclusive and embedded within governance, enabling the partnership to deliver a co-produced, sustainable SEND Reform Plan that meets the core minimum requirements.

10. Risks and Mitigations

What are the key risks that could affect the successful implementation of your Local SEND Reform Plan, and what mitigation strategies are in place to manage these risks? Please include a maximum of 5 risks with impact and likelihood RAG for each risk. See Annex C for suggested risk matrix.

11. Dependencies

Please detail the key areas of the local area partnership’s proposed SEND future state and roadmap that may be impacted by wider reforms nationally and locally and outline how you will manage these. We expect these will include but not be limited to:

• NHS reforms
• Local Government Re-organisation
• Reforms to Children’s Social Care
• Best Start in Life, including Family Hubs
• Best Start In Life Strategy
• Curriculum and Assessment Review

Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) is expected to almost triple the number of schools within our area, the majority of the additional ones are currently local authority maintained. This will significantly alter the balance between maintained schools and academy trusts, creating additional pressure on central local authority functions, particularly finance and HR services.

Partnership working in Portsmouth is well established and has been intentionally developed over time. While our size is not the sole determinant of this strength, it has enabled closer and more consistent collaboration. Multi-Academy Trusts are widely regarded as key partners working alongside the local authority in Portsmouth; this level of alignment is less consistent in neighbouring Hampshire. As the system scales, establishing and maintaining professional trust across a wider partnership landscape will be critical.

The Integrated Care Board (ICB) footprint already extends beyond both current and proposed boundaries, which we anticipate will support system alignment through LGR. However, the increased number of schools will require a review and potential redesign of current cluster arrangements and the Experts at Hand (EaH) model. We intend to draw on learning from both Portsmouth and Hampshire to identify and scale effective practice, recognising that system pressures differ (for example, higher levels of EOTAS in Hampshire). Future models will need to be responsive to these differing contexts.

Delivery of the Best Start in Life (BSiL) strategy is intrinsically linked to SEND reform. In recent years, growth in EHC needs assessments and plans has been most pronounced in the early years. Strengthening parental confidence that children’s needs will be identified and met in mainstream provision (where appropriate) is therefore a shared priority. Workstreams are aligned strategically and operationally, with joint representation across governance structures to ensure coherence.

Operationally, we are aligning school cluster models with Family Hubs, with further extension into early years settings. Role alignment is underway between Best Start Inclusion Practioners (BSIPS) Outreach Officers to ensure consistency in both family-facing and setting-facing support. We are also mindful of workforce impacts and are taking steps to avoid unintended pressure on existing services, particularly early years and health provision.

The developing Support Hub (through Family Help) is being designed in alignment with the Inclusion Hub (LISO) established through the Change Programme. These models are intended to complement one another, enabling a more integrated and holistic response to the needs of families and education settings. A key focus will be maintaining strong coordination and avoiding duplication. Leadership across both hubs will continue to review practice, processes and communication, adapting delivery in response to feedback as services evolve.

Section 3 – Monitoring and Evaluation

• How will the local area partnership know delivery is on track?

Please set out how you will monitor and track progress referencing:

• Monitoring tools and processes - the specific tools, systems, and data you will

use to track delivery milestones and measure the impact on outcomes.

Some Local Area Partnerships hold data in a central SEND operational dashboard. This is used by teams on a weekly basis to identify trends in demand or inform conversations with local school or setting leaders.

In some Local Area Partnerships, a view of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) is reviewed monthly by a SEND Board to take decisions on prioritisation, resourcing and delivery of services informed by regular data.

Please set out how you will use data to track demand (e.g., EHCP applications for assessment), Service delivery (e.g., Speech and Language Specialists deployment; places created), Service quality (e.g., parental satisfaction) and outputs (e.g., pupil attendance; pupil exclusions)

• Feedback and adaptation mechanisms - what feedback loops and stakeholder input you will use to review progress and adjust

your approach.

The inclusion Hub proactively tracks data including: attendance, attainment, EHCNA requests, reduced timetables, suspension, exclusions and violent incident reports. This data is used to monitor the impact of support and to target resources and interventions, as well as responding to requests. Data is evaluated in context and through discussion with the school/ setting. An inclusion review is conducted to further support this process. Feedback from parent/carers is gathered via the Parent Hubs and shared with the Inclusion Hub to identify and respond to systemic issues. Our planned cluster approach will have feedback mechanism embedded onto the Terms of Reference. This will incorporate feedback from families, the voice of children and young people, schools from education settings and the wider partnership.. Our annual Inclusion Outreach Survey, which has an excellent response level, will be expanded to incorporate feedback on Experts at Hand in additional to the outreach offer. Feedback will be sought via Head teacher meetings and SNECO Networks.

We expect to see a decreased in school responses that they "can't meet need", an increase in spaces in support bases and school requests to create specialist bases.

13. Reporting to DfE

Using the attached data template, the local area partnership is required to provide quarterly data returns to DfE against selected key metrics. DfE will, in turn, provide quarterly data reports with visualised analysis and benchmarking that will support your local delivery, monitoring and evaluation. This will include data the department holds on

Attendance, Exclusions, and Unauthorised absence.

Please use the attached data template to upload your initial data return to DfE.

Data Document attached Q 13 Nb 1. After adding the income in row 28, the Total in-year surplus (+) or deficit (-) line 38 should read Total in-year surplus (-) or deficit (+) but we have not amended this on your template

Section 4 – Governance

• How will the local area partnership ensure delivery of plans remain on track?

Please outline the governance structures in place to oversee delivery. Clearly set out who is responsible for overseeing reform delivery, what each governance group or individual is accountable for, and how these arrangements ensure progress is monitored and decisions are made transparently. Please identify where the named SRO for the Local SEND Reform Plan sits within the governance structure and ensure your response incorporates the core minimum requirements.

If you have a diagram to show the relationship between these governance mechanisms, please upload this here.

***Insert Document Upload Link*** Attachment Q 14. Governance mechanisms

Section 5 – Central Government Support

15. How can we help you?

Please outline any practical support you need from central government to implement your plan effectively.

This may include:

• Access to specialist expertise or advisory support
• Help with workforce development or recruitment challenges
• Tools or templates to support data collection, reporting, or evaluation
• Facilitation of peer learning or regional collaboration
• Support with system-level coordination across education, health, and care
• Guidance on navigating regulatory or policy barriers

Awaiting Inclusion Standards and ISP guidance. We understand that these are not due imminently, but will be needed to successfully implement the reforms Facilitation of peer learning and collaboration across statistical neighbours as well as regional collaboration.

Local Government Reorganisation means that from April 28 we will no longer be operating as PCC. Central Government join up across departments will be needed to ensure that SEND Reform implementation is sustained into LGR and beyond.

Annex B - Supporting Documents

Annex C – Risk Matrix