SEND reform must be judged by children's lives - not council dashboards

Over the past few weeks I’ve spoken to SEND parents across this division and Norfolk more widely, as well as organisations and campaigners. The message has been clear: families are not opposed to reform, but they are deeply worried that “inclusion” could become a target rather than a promise of better support.

I want SEND reform in Norfolk to succeed. I want earlier support, better communication, stronger mainstream provision where that is right for the child, and a system where families do not have to fight for every bit of help.

But we have to be honest: a plan is only as good as the measures used to judge whether it is working.

At the moment, some of the headline metrics worry me.

Reducing persistent absence might sound positive but for some SEND children, absence is linked to autistic burnout, anxiety, medical needs, trauma or Emotionally Based School Avoidance. A more flexible approach to absence can often be a sign the system is more responsive to the child's needs.

Reducing requests for special school provision might also sound like success but not if it means children who genuinely need specialist support are delayed, discouraged or left in unsuitable settings in order to meet a performance indicator.

So my question was simple:

Where are the child-centred measures? Are children happier? Safer? More engaged? Making progress? Feeling they belong? Are families actually feeling better supported?

That is what success should mean.

As a SEND parent, this is not abstract to me. I know how exhausting the system can be for families. I will support reform where it means better support earlier but I will challenge anything that risks turning inclusion into a numbers exercise.

This is the first in a series of questions I’ll be raising on SEND in Norfolk.

Better SEND starts with listening to children and families and measuring what actually matters.