Norfolk Local SEND Reform Plan 2026

Record of Individual Cabinet Member Decision

Decision Details

Responsible Cabinet Member: Cllr Wendy Atkinson: Cabinet member for Children, Families and SEND

Background and Purpose: Earlier this year, the Government commissioned all local areas to prepare a Local SEND Reform Plan following the publication of the Schools’ White Paper (Every Child Achieving and Thriving) and consultation on national SEND reforms (SEND reform putting children and young people first).

A high level of partnership work has taken place with more than 17 engagement sessions held between March and May to develop the Norfolk proposals. That feedback from families, children and young people, schools, multi-academy trusts, early years providers, post-16 providers, health partners, our Parent Carer Forum (Family Voice Norfolk), and Sendiass has ensured the wider area partners shaped the plan.

The resulting drafted plan focuses on investment and improvements in mainstream provision and areas of immediate impact, while recognising that elements requiring legislative change - such as statutory plans and independent provision - will depend on future Government policy. It builds on Norfolk’s established SEND and AP Strategy (NASAPs) and our existing Local First Inclusion transformation programme, strengthening ongoing transformation work and positioning the county well to deliver national expectations and better outcomes for children.

The plan is also critical to financial sustainability, as Government approval is linked to funding to address the High Needs Block deficit, providing short-term stability but with longer-term risks remaining. The programme will continue to evolve, with further iterations expected alongside national reform, supported by ongoing reporting to Cabinet and the relevant select committee.

Decision:

1. To approve Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan and endorse its submission to Government 2. Recommend to Full Council the approval and acceptance of the Experts at Hand Grant from the Department for Education to invest in services for the next 3 financial years. 3. To delegate to the Director of Procurement and Sustainability authority to undertake the necessary procurement processes to implement the plan including, modifying or terminating existing contracts and letting new contracts. This will be in accordance with the council’s Contract Standing Orders and Procurement Strategy and all relevant procurement legislation in consultation, as appropriate, with the responsible Cabinet Member.

Is it a key decision? Yes

Is it subject to call-in? No

If Yes – the deadline for call-in is: N/A

Impact of the Decision

As detailed in the attached report.

Evidence and reason for the decision

As detailed in the attached report.

Alternative options considered and rejected

As detailed in the attached report.

Financial, Resource or other implications considered

As detailed in the attached report.

Record of any conflict of interest:

None

Background documents

Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan report

Date of Decision: 18 June 2026

Publication Date of Decision: 19 June 2026

Signed by Cabinet Member: Cllr Wendy Atkinson

I confirm that I have made the decision set out above, for the reasons also set out.

Signed: Wendy Atkinson

Print name: Cllr Wendy Atkinson

Date: 19 June 2026

Accompanying documents: [Insert accompanying documents]

Once you have completed your internal department clearance process and obtained agreement of the Cabinet ember, send your completed decision notice together with the report and green form to committees@norfolk.gov.uk

Report to Cabinet

Item No:

Report Title: Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan

Date of Meeting: 19 June 2026

Responsible Cabinet Member: Cllr Wendy Atkinson: Cabinet member for Children, Families and SEND

Responsible Director: Sara Tough Obe: Executive Director, Children’s Services

Is this a Key Decision? yes

If this is a Key Decision, date added to the Forward Plan of Key Decisions:

15 June 2026 (special urgency notice published)

Executive Summary

This report accompanies Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan, developed in response to the Department for Education’s requirement for all local areas to submit an initial local plan as the first phase of the implementation of national reforms.

The plan has been shaped through engagement with system partners, parents and carers, children and young people and Norfolk’s Local Inclusion Partnership, alongside feedback from DfE and NHS England advisors. This collaborative approach has enabled Norfolk to submit a plan that reflects local priorities and existing progress, while meeting national expectations and securing the necessary sign-off from the local partnerships

Building on our existing arrangements, the ambitions over the next three years within the plan include:

• Roll out of a consistent Norfolk approach for universal inclusive practice.

Significant expansion of the expertise available to Norfolk’s mainstream schools and settings – embedding new roles within the existing Zone and Team Around the School infrastructure that is part of our SEND and Inclusion Support Model.

Development of similar support models for early years and post 16 phases so that those parts of the education system have similarly easy access to expertise, advice and guidance, and to develop effective partnership working.

Establishing peer-to-peer outreach between trusts and schools so that those with strong SEND provision can support the wider system.

• Roll out of mental health support teams to all schools by 2028.

Delivery of a significant reduction in waiting times for assessment for neurodiversity to 18 weeks by 2028.

Completion of our capital programme of Specialist Resource Bases and enhanced provisions across Norfolk, delivering the Government vision for widespread access to Inclusion bases for the children that need them.

Completion of the 3-tier Alternative Provision model, with collaborative partnerships between all Norfolk secondary schools and extensive outreach to prevent exclusions.

Strengthening the accountability of the Local Inclusion Partnership to provide the leadership and build the confidence of agencies across the system to achieve the cultural change needed.

As a result, we expect confidence, capability and capacity to increase across the SEND system, creating settings that are more equipped to recognise and meet need, leading to a greater number of children flourishing in mainstream settings. This, alongside the growing maturity of the partnership, will increase the confidence of families in those supporting them and, ultimately, improve outcomes for all children.

The DfE will now consider our proposed plan (and those from other LA areas) and will inform us in the autumn as to whether it has been approved or not. The Government have indicated that we should look to implement our plan as quickly as possible, and so we are now moving into the implementation phase.

Recommendations:

1. To approve Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan and endorse its submission to Government 2. Recommend to Full Council the approval and acceptance of the Experts at Hand Grant from the Department for Education to invest in services for the next 3 financial years. 3. To delegate to the Director of Procurement and Sustainability authority to undertake the necessary procurement processes to implement the plan including, modifying or terminating existing contracts and letting new contracts. This will be in accordance with the council’s Contract Standing Orders and Procurement Strategy and all relevant procurement legislation in consultation, as appropriate, with the responsible Cabinet Member.

1. Background and Purpose

1.1 Earlier this year, the Government commissioned all local areas to prepare a Local SEND Reform Plan following the publication of the Schools’ White Paper (Every Child Achieving and Thriving) and consultation relating to national SEND Reforms (SEND reform putting children and young people first).

1.2 There was only a short timeline allowed to produce these local plans, with initial drafts due to the Department for Education (DfE) appointed advisors on the 19 May, and final plans submitted by the 19 June to the DfE.

1.3 Despite this, a high level of partnership work has taken place with more than 17 engagement sessions held between March and May. That feedback from families, children and young people, schools, multi-academy trusts, early years providers, post-16 providers, health partners, our Parent Carer Forum (Family Voice Norfolk), and Sendiass has ensured the wider area partners shaped the plan.

1.4 This initial plan is a positive development for the local system and focuses on the change and investment of new monies into enhanced support in the mainstream sector and other areas where we can make immediate impact. The plan does not incorporate implementation of reforms to the SEND system which require legislative change such as any changes to statutory plans, the legal tribunal process or the frameworks for the operation of independent specialist provision. Where such legislative changes are required, Government will need to come forward with final policy positions following the national consultation before we can then consider how policy might be implemented locally.

1.5 Norfolk has been delivering a substantial programme of transformation and investment for children with special educational needs and disabilities for a number of years through our Local First Inclusion agenda. This revised plan therefore builds upon that existing work and seeks to further strengthen our system of support and continue the journey to a maximally inclusive education system in the County as well as delivering the right specialist support where it is needed. Norfolk’s transformation has in many areas happened ahead of the national reforms meaning we are well placed to deliver and have more of the national vision in place already than in many other council areas.

1.6 As well as improving outcomes for children, the plan is also materially important in relation to the financial sustainability of the system because the Government has linked approval of SEND Reform Plans to funding to address the accruing cumulative deficit within the High Needs Block of the Dedicated Schools Grant. As described in the financial implications section, approval of this plan by Government will provide that stability in the short term by addressing the current deficit position. However, substantial risks remain over the longer-term and Government policy is still evolving in relation to the funding of SEND and AP provision in the future.

1.7 This plan, and the programme of work, it describes will continue to expand and evolve over the coming years. It is an initial plan, and the Government expects that local areas will prepare revised plans periodically, taking into account national reforms as they are implemented alongside local progression and our intention is for regular reporting to both Cabinet and the relevant Select Committee.

2. Proposal

2.1 Norfolk’s SEND Reform Plan has been prepared using the DfE template with associated appendices providing further detail. The plan, in its entirety, is attached as an appendix to this report. Having completed the formal submission, it is intended that a more user- friendly version is prepared for Norfolk locally to support understanding and awareness by all system partners, along with children and young people and their families and carers. Some of the key aspects of the plan are summarised below.

Our Vision

2.2 Our vision is to build a maximally inclusive system that supports children to flourish throughout their childhood and prepares them for adulthood. Improved capacity and capability of our workforce will mean that most children will be able to access mainstream education that meets their developmental needs and, where specialist provision is needed, this will be closer to home and work in partnership with the mainstream sector.

2.3 High-quality, empowered teaching will be an expectation of all settings, delivered within an ethos of inclusion that enables children to access their learning environments successfully. Consistency of practice throughout a setting enables children to be fully included everywhere, every day. 2.4 We need to build trust and confidence across all settings, partners, children and families. Support, communication and processes need to operate quickly, transparently and be based on trusted relationships.

Structure of the Plan: Building Blocks of a Transformed System 2.5 The Norfolk plan to deliver this vision is organised into four key blocks of activity summarising our work at the universal, targeted and specialist levels as well as how we will work as a partnership to deliver. This is shown below and the content of the various workstreams is included within the full plan documentation.

Experts at Hand Offer 2.7 Within the programme the most significant area of new investment relates to funding of a new ‘Experts at Hand’ offer in every local authority area. On 5 June 2026 the Department for Education issued a new grant for £429m to local authorities working in partnership with local system partners to provide an offer of advice and direct support to early years education settings, mainstream schools and further education colleges by providing a new route to access expert advice and support from education and health professionals. Norfolk’s allocation for 2026-27 is £5.907m and we anticipate the amount being higher in future years and that this year’s allocation reflects a part-year effect. 2.8 Locally over the last two years we have already established a ‘team around the school’ approach as part of our SEND and Inclusion Support Model, which brings together a range of experts and professionals so that those working in mainstream schools can call in extra support and advice in relation to children with SEND in their classrooms. As a result, we are well placed to deliver and will intentionally use the new funding to enhance the existing approach and invest in more experts, to be readily available to work with cohorts of children, and upskill teachers and other school staff to confidently adjust their teaching and school systems so that they work for all children, including those with SEND. If successful this will ensure all children are able to access the curriculum offer and are engaged in learning, which, in turn, will reduce any disruption in classrooms, improve attendance and support all children to flourish and achieve. 2.9 We have worked closely with the sector in the design of this element of the plan; in particular, as well as expanding the range of expertise, it is our intention to ensure that early years and post-16 settings also benefit from similar wrap-around support in future.

3 Impact of the Proposal

3.1 The overall goals and anticipated impact of the proposal is that:

More children can flourish in mainstream settings

The confidence of parents, carers and children & young people is improved

We deliver better value for money and stabilisation of finances over the medium to longer term by rebalancing spend towards the mainstream sector

3.2 The plan includes a set of key success measures to tell us, as a system, whether outcomes are improving and whether we are progressing towards these goals. These headline measures are:

Increased proportion of Cyp on mainstream school rolls (including Specialist Resource Bases)

Reduction in Neet rates for post-16 Yp

Reduced requests for special school provision

Reduction of persistent and severe absence rates

Increased availability of experts per child and young person

3.3 Nationally the trends in many key areas such as requests for EHCPs, special school placements, applications to the tribunal and waiting lists for support are worsening. In Norfolk it is a variable picture; in some areas we can see a clear impact of our existing work, such as in reducing exclusions and more schools reporting greater confidence in meeting need, but, equally, we still see rising numbers of children with identified needs and the continuation of high referral rates for specialist support. Therefore, the trajectories as set out in this report aim for a realistic view of impact over the next few years. It is widely

acknowledged that a complete transformation of the SEND system will take at least five years and probably longer to fully deliver and embed and that, in the first instance, the kind of ‘stabilisation’ projected by these figures represents a realistic projection of what is achievable

3.4 The headline measures listed above will be supported by a longer suite of partnership agreed non-financial metrics, aligned with our agreed joint strategic needs assessment (JSNA) priorities, and financial metrics. The longer list of topics that it is proposed that metrics are developed upon are included in an appendix to the main plan; these are aligned to our Joint Strategic Needs Assessment priorities.

4 Alternative Options

4.1 The submission of a SEND Reform plan is a mandatory national requirement. The acceptance and deployment of new national funding streams for SEND is of clear benefit to the local area and there has been a strong consensus within all of the engagement to date around the positive opportunities this plan brings.

4.2 As such we have not provided a range of ‘options’ but have articulated a plan which is judged, by key stakeholders, to be the right one for Norfolk and which has been formally endorsed by the Local Inclusion Partnership.

4.3 However, the plan will be under continual review and will iterate and evolve as we go through implementation and as the Government reacts to its completed consultation in relation to other aspects of the proposed national SEND reforms. As such, we will continue to follow the evidence of what is working and seek to identify areas where our approach needs to change and, therefore, Cabinet Members and Councillors will have further opportunities to have oversight of any future version of the plan and programme as it moves forward, including option appraisals, where appropriate.

5 Financial Implications

5.1 As described above, the SEND Reform plan articulates how Norfolk intends to deploy its share of new national funding allocations, most substantively an investment of c.£5.9m in the new ‘Experts at Hand’ offer and the most recent allocation of High Needs Capital Allocation funding, which was c. £15m for the current financial year. Mainstream schools, post-16 providers and early years settings will also receive new funding directly from government (Inclusive Mainstream Funding) which should positively impact on their ability to support children with SEND. These national grant allocations are new monies and are ring-fenced for specific purposes around SEND for the benefit of children in Norfolk.

5.2 Therefore, the implementation of this plan, and the spending decisions in relation to these new grants, do not have a direct impact on the core budget of the County Council or commit us to any new local spend beyond the grant monies themselves. Clearly though, Norfolk has made substantial revenue and capital investments ahead of these new national funding streams and so the total level of investment in the Norfolk system will probably be greater than in most LA areas. As such, the new grants do link to the overall level of spend and level of resource in the SEND system, but they are separate to the main High Needs Block funding (part of the Dedicated Schools Grant), which continues to be in substantial financial deficit. That deficit does impact on the finances of the County Council who, at the current

time, are still managing the cash flow implications of holding the debt, which has a significant treasury management impact.

5.3 The High Needs Block has faced significant financial pressure for several years, mirroring a picture across multiple local authority areas. In particular, this reflects the increased demand for provision that is not within a mainstream settings, such as independent special school or packages of support for children not on a school roll, alongside investment to seek to mitigate these patterns, such as investment in high needs support for children in mainstream provision (including specialist resource bases). 5.4 The plan includes the latest forecast outturn for the High Needs Block, which is based on the latest modelling, after the 2025-26 outturn and early 2026-27 data. This reflects a forecast in-year deficit of £97.514m, which includes the budgeted deficit of £95.000m plus an additional projected spend of £2.514m. 5.5 The intention of the Norfolk’s Local SEND Reform Plan is to create a consistent experience for families and the right conditions for increased inclusion in mainstream settings. The aim is to reduce the need for specialist school provision which should reduce this deficit position overtime. It should be noted that this position has been forecast before the new academic year in September when there could be significant changes to placements, particularly with the impact of tribunal related decisions.

5.6 As part of the Final Local Government Settlement for 2026-27, the DfE announced a High Needs Stability Grant that means the Government will fund 90% of eligible, cumulative Dsg deficits as of 31 March 2026. Payment is expected in Autumn 2026 once the Local SEND reform plan is approved following its submission to the DfE on the 19 of June 2026. In line with the Final Local Government Settlement for 2026-27, the remaining 10% of cumulative Dsg deficits as of 31 March 2026 must be funded by Ncc. Within the 2025-26 outturn and the 2026-27 monitoring position, the Council has identified proposals which are intended to address the forecast 10% local contribution as of 31 March 2026. Recommendations in relation to these will be included in the relevant reports to Cabinet on 29 June 2026.

5.7 Consequently, the approval of the Norfolk plan is materially important to the financial sustainability of both Ncc and the wider SEND system. If the plan is approved, the clearing of the existing deficit will provide a temporary alleviation of the threat of severe financial difficulties, which is real for many LAs. However, substantial risks remain. If the Norfolk plan is not approved there will be an opportunity to re-submit 6 months later but, given the scale of current overall deficit, even a 6-month delay would have a multi-million-pound impact as a result of the ongoing treasury management impact. More fundamentally, the issue of deficits accruing in 2026/27 and 2027/28 on the High Needs Block remains unresolved, and under current projections, the cumulative deficit would rise again to more than £200m over those two financial years, once again creating a very substantial risk to the Norfolk position. We continue to urge Government to provide clarity on how that situation is to be resolved.

6 Resource Implications

6.1 Workforce: The proposals within the plan include a substantial increase in the number of roles and workers in the Norfolk SEND system, to deliver the new Experts at Hand Offer where more than 100 new roles will need to be recruited. One of the identified risks is the

ability of local areas to secure this number of new workers at the pace envisaged and the potential to de-stabilise existing services arising from all LAs seeking to recruit therapists, psychologists and specialist teachers simultaneously. Our proposal seeks to mitigate this with a phased approach and a more diverse range of worker types, but the risk remains, and we may need to demonstrate some flexibility and amend our plan if it is not possible to recruit to all of the planned roles. The Experts at Hand offer has been designed with our Integrated Care Board partners, based upon our significant partnership-wide engagement, and will be jointly commissioned. In some areas, we will be undertaking procurement processes to access the new resource, whilst others will be employed directly by the LA or Icb; this decision includes delegated authority to secure these resources, as expected through the terms of the grant from Government.

6.2 Property: As described in the plan a significant investment is planned in capital schemes to support children with SEND creating new special school places, specialist resource bases but also setting aside funding to support schools to do works to mainstream school building so that they create the right environments which facilitate inclusion.

6.3 It: No significant implications

7 Other Implications

7.1 Legal Implications: No significant implications

7.2 Human Rights Implications: No significant implications

7.3 Equality Impact Assessment: The heart of the SEND Reform plan is to enhance a system of support for children with SEND and to, therefore, improve outcomes for a significant cohort of children who might otherwise be disadvantaged. As such the assessment of impact is positive from an equality perspective. More specifically, the impact of the proposal section of this paper and the metrics highlight the specific intended benefits which include

Children’s needs being identified earlier and more accurately

The mainstream education system, across all the age-ranges, being better able to support children with SEND and adjust approaches to teaching and learning such that children flourish

Easier access to specialist help – including with health issues or clinical support

Improved attendance and engagement in education

Reduced disruption to learning, which will impact all children, with or without SEND, positively

Fewer children reaching a point of crisis whereby they need to exit the mainstream education system There are no specific disbenefits arising from the proposals in this plan and, therefore, no concerns about negative impacts arising from the proposals from an equality perspective.

7.4 Data Protection Impact Assessments (Dpia): No significant implications

7.5 Health and Safety implications: No significant implications

7.6 Sustainability Implications: No significant implications

7.7 Impact of Devolution on the decision: No significant implications

7.8 Impact on Devolution of the decision: No significant implications

7.9 Impact of Local Government Reorganisation on the decision: Local Government Reorganisation poses by far the most substantial challenge to the Norfolk programme,

absorbing a substantial level of leadership capacity in all parts of the system and requiring transformational change to disaggregate the existing arrangements into three areas. Delivering SEND reform alongside the Lgr programme will be hugely stretching. The other key risk is that the three new authorities will set different paths to take forward SEND arrangements, creating inconsistency of experiences for children and complexity for families, schools and wider stakeholders. Schools have been clear that they want a consistent Norfolk operating model. We will attempt to mitigate this risk by ensuring that the detailed design work for our SEND reform plan is mindful of the planned move to a three unitary model, wherever possible, but the risk of fragmentation and delay is very real.

7.10 Impact on Local Government Reorganisation of the decision: As above, potentially the scale of the SEND reform programme will stretch the capacity of the same senior leaders and operational staff who are charged with delivering the re-organisation, creating a risk to implementation ahead of vesting day.

8 Risk Implications

8.1 A key specific financial risk remains in relation to the continued expansion of the independent sector in Norfolk. Modelling considered the impact of additional pressures seen since the budget was set and the lack of certainty about the timing of any additional controls to the independent sector that the Government has now indicated are expected as part of the reforms. Without these, the national issue endures whereby the independent sector continues to expand with limited control and no consideration for local sufficiency planning. Local areas, including Norfolk, cannot limit this expansion. 8.2 Demand for, and supply of, independent specialist placements has continued to rise across the year. While wider SEND reforms have not yet provided the level of certainty originally expected, the Government’s Every Child Achieving and Thriving paper confirms an intention to reform the legal framework for independent special schools. The proposed changes are designed to ensure that children receive suitable, high‑quality placements and that local authorities pay reasonable, transparent prices for provision.

8.3 In the meantime, demographic changes are creating vacant school buildings locally, and independent providers are actively seeking opportunities to purchase or lease these sites ahead of the new requirements coming into force. This expansion activity, combined with ongoing trends of pressure for specialist provision, including through tribunals, continues to drive sustained growth in independent special school placements and associated costs year-after-year. Whilst this plan seeks to have a beneficial impact locally on supporting children to be included in mainstream settings, there remains risks that if Government action does not mitigate the supply of independent specialist provision, then it is expected that there will be continued higher spend on this sector and the deficit on the High Needs Block would continue to grow.

9 Select Committee Comments

9.1 Due to the Government timelines, this proposal has not been to Select Committee, but the plan is scheduled to be considered at the July meeting. There is an expectation of ongoing

Select Committee oversight on a regular basis including where further iterations of the plan are submitted to Government.

10 Background Papers

10.1 [insert links to background papers]

Officer Contact

If you have any questions about matters contained within this paper, please get in touch with: Officer names: James Wilson Jane Hayman Email: james.wilson@norfolk.gov.uk jane.hayman@norfolk.gov.uk If you need this report in large print, audio, braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.

Norfolk SEND Reform Plan

June 2026

Signatories

Name of Local Authority: Norfolk County Council Name of Integrated Care Board: NHS Norfolk and Suffolk Integrated Care Board (Icb) Local SEND Reform Plan Sro: Sara Tough, Executive Director Children’s Services, Norfolk County Council

Our SEND perform plan was also formally endorsed by our Local Inclusion Partnership (Lip) at an Extraordinary Lip Meeting on 8 June 2026. It has also been approved by Councillor Wendy Atkinson, the newly appointed Cabinet Member for Children, Families and SEND.

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Norfolk has already begun building an inclusive system through our existing transformation programme, establishing many of the building blocks for all children, including those with SEND, to flourish in education. We have:

• developed a comprehensive strategic and child-level view of need
• introduced collaborative zone partnerships to bring schools together
• created a team around the school (Tas) model to make experts available
• developed a nationally leading Specialist Resource Base model which, along with our

Enhanced Specialist Provisions, is delivering the Government vision for a network of inclusion bases

• begun implementing the tiered AP model with early support, outreach and transitional

provision.

Our local authority and NHS partnership is strong with commitment from NHS provider teams and local partners to embed access through zones as the core delivery route for the future.

Our joint strategic needs and local maturity assessments, however, show further distance to travel:

• Norfolk continues to have a higher than national proportion of children identified with

SEND, especially Semh needs

• This reflects gaps in the system of support (including in relation to mental health and

neurodiversity) and mainstream schools vary in their provision, confidence and capacity, with some requiring further support to embed inclusive teaching and targeted SEN support

• Earlier and more accurate identification of needs is required, as high Semh identification

reflects a range of different underlying developmental barriers, family context, neurodiversity and other challenges

• Early Years support can be further strengthened to identify development needs earlier so

that more children start primary school ‘school ready’

• Families’ experiences of joint working between education, health and social

care professionals are improving, but still somewhat variable

• Consequently, despite substantial progress, too many children are still exiting mainstream

education and parental confidence in the system is mixed.

We have, therefore, been thoughtful in how we use the reforms to address these challenges, engaging the sector extensively in the development of the next phase of transformation. Building on our existing arrangements, our ambition over the next three years is to:

• Roll out a Norfolk Relational Practice Framework which will incorporate trauma-informed

practice, nurture principles and Norfolk STEPs to support consistent, inclusive, universal practice across all settings

• Further expand the zone and Tas model by integrating community health services and

significantly expanding professional access through the experts at hand funding

• Develop similar support models for early years and post 16 phases
• Complete the 3-tier AP model rollout, with collaborative partnerships between all Norfolk

secondary schools and extensive outreach

• Establish peer-to-peer outreach between trusts and schools so that those

with strong SEND provision can support the wider system

• Complete the rollout of mental health support teams to all schools by 2028
• Significant reduction in NDD assessments waiting times to 18-week ambition by 2028
• Complete our capital programme establishing SRBs across Norfolk, and continue to support

schools to create ESPs, delivering the Government vision for widespread access to Inclusion bases As a result, we expect to see professionals’ confidence, capability and capacity to increase, creating settings that are more equipped to recognise and meet need, leading to a greater number of children flourishing in mainstream settings. This, alongside the ongoing strengthening of the partnership, will increase the confidence of families in the system. Underpinned by national reform, this should result in a stabilisation of the financial position of the local system.

Section 1: Vision and Goals

1. What is the local area partnership trying to achieve?

Our vision is to build a maximally inclusive system that supports children to flourish throughout their childhood and prepares them for adulthood, building on Norfolk’s Flourish ambition for children and young people, our co-produced Norfolk Area SEND & AP Strategy and our Local First Inclusion Transformation Programme.

As a partnership, we will continue work to build a 0-25 system where children are included, achieve and thrive. Improved capacity and capability of our workforce will mean that most children will be able to access mainstream education that meets their development needs and, where specialist provision is needed, this is closer to home and works in partnership with the mainstream sector.

High-quality, empowered teaching is an expectation of all settings, delivered within an ethos of inclusion that enables children to access their learning environments successfully. Consistency of practice throughout a setting enables children to be fully included everywhere, every day.

We need to build trust and confidence across all settings, partners, children and families. Support, communication and processes need to operate quickly, transparently and be based on trusted relationships.

Our goals are:

• More children can flourish in mainstream settings (e.g. improved attendance rates, academic

progress, reduced referrals for special school and alternative provision, reduced exclusion, reduced elective home education due to needs not being met, increased reintegration)

• Improved confidence of parents, carers and children & young people (e.g. as above,

feedback from children, young people and families)

• In combination with Government reforms, deliver better value for money and stabilisation of

finances over the medium to longer term by rebalancing spend towards the mainstream sector, with reduced reliance on independent sector placements

Section 2: Strategy

2. Where the local area partnership expects to be in the next three years

Building Blocks

Where we are Where we will be in the next three years

Building Block 1: Through the significant progress made, underpinned by the In three years, Norfolk will have a more inclusive mainstream system with Strengthening Local First Inclusion (Lfi) transformation programme and a shared universal offer across early years, schools and post-16. Settings universal the co-produced Area SEND and Alternative Provision will be equipped to identify and meet development needs early, inclusion core Strategy, there is a clear, shared ambition across the supported through consistent use of evidence-based tools, a Norfolk offer across partnership to strengthen mainstream inclusion, improve relational practice framework incorporates trauma-informed practice, mainstream outcomes for children and young people (Cyp) with SEND, nurture principles and Norfolk STEPs, zone collaboration and stronger settings and ensure support is delivered as locally and effectively as transition pathways. This will reduce escalation, exclusions and long-term possible.

specialist placements, while improving children’s access to high-quality support in their local community, reflecting the national vision set out in A core model has been developed through the SEND and the Schools White Paper. Families and professionals will, therefore, have Inclusion Support Model (Sism), providing a strong basis for greater confidence that the mainstream system can meet children’s development. Zone-based collaboration happens through needs, and that they can achieve and thrive. In turn, this should reduce Team Around a School (Tas) and Zone Inclusion Partnerships referrals for specialist provision and children not on a school roll, leading (ZIPs), helping schools access advice, share responsibility and to stabilisation of finances in the medium to longer term.

work less in isolation (see Appendix A - Analysis of Need and The vision is to embed a culture of inclusion in everyday practice, school Existing SEND and Inclusion Support Model Infrastructure).

ethos, and leadership, enabling all children to flourish, including: Norfolk has established shared tools and frameworks for A clear, partnership-owned universal offer across all phases, that has schools, including the Provision Expected at SEN Support been co-produced, regularly refreshed using local needs data, built (PEaSS), Identification of Needs Descriptors in Educational around a shared set of expectations for inclusive practice, and aligned to Settings (Indes), Inclusion and Provision Self-Evaluation national inclusion standards.

Framework (Ipsef) and Graduated Provision Maps (GPMs), Consistently strong mainstream provision, meaning Cyp get help earlier which provide common expectations, self-evaluation and and close to home through use of shared tools across the system, planning support. These tools were co-produced stronger universal classroom practice (especially for speech, language and are regularly refreshed and, alongside our Joint Strategic and communication, Nd, Semh, and sensory and executive functioning Needs Assessment, have enabled us to develop a needs), more consistent use of relational approaches, and better adult comprehensive strategic and child-level view of need (see confidence in adapting curriculum, environment and teaching.

Appendix A - Analysis of Need and Existing SEND and Inclusion Support Model Infrastructure).

Local support and challenge through zone-based collaboration enabling the partnership to take shared responsibility for inclusion.

Families and professionals can access early support through the Local Offer webpages and the SEND and A substantial expansion of inclusion support into Early Years, linked to the Inclusion phoneline.

Best Start Family Hubs & Healthy Babies programme, enabling better understanding of sufficiency through enhanced data sharing across However, Norfolk still faces significant challenges, including partners, stronger early identification of emerging development needs, an elevated prevalence of Semh needs (73% higher rate as a proactive engagement with families where children are at risk of not primary need in EHCPs compared to national averages), high

Demand for specialist placements, however, continues to The future system will see specialist provision used more strategically as outpace supply because too many children’s needs are not part of a continuum of support. Clearer pathways, being met in mainstream settings, leading to many improved decision-making, and stronger integration between children being educated outside their local communities, or mainstream and specialist services will ensure that children access not on a school roll, with significant system and financial specialist provision when it is the right choice for their needs, and for pressures, and impacting outcomes.

the appropriate duration. The Experts at Hand model will play a key role in this, enabling specialist expertise to support mainstream inclusion and The priority is therefore twofold: to ensure sufficiency reduce unnecessary escalation.

of high-quality specialist places, mitigating the need for independent provision, while also reducing reliance on Our local mediation and dispute resolution will have been strengthened specialist provision through stronger mainstream inclusion through the redesign of early resolution pathways, the introduction of and clearer pathways that ensure the right child is in the right guidance and toolkits, and increased engagement earlier to reduce provision at the right time.

reliance on formal mediation and tribunal escalation. Monitoring will focus on timeliness (end-to-end case tracking), resolution rates (informal Work is underway to strengthen our local mediation and vs formal and post-mediation outcomes), and effectiveness (reduced dispute resolution as part of our existing transformation escalation and improved early resolution), supported by existing provider programme. We have reviewed current pathways, begun data and wider Lfi Kpi reporting.

developing a mediation guidance pack and dispute resolution toolkit, and established access to mediation data and Power Bi reporting to support improvement.

Building Block 4: Norfolk demonstrates strong, collaborative partnership Partnerships across education, health and care will be increasingly Enhancing working through shared strategy, governance and integrated at both strategic and local levels, with shared accountability coproduction co-production. System leadership via Cypsa and Lip enables for outcomes. Norfolk’s Sism, along with Experts at and coordinated decision-making, joint accountability and a Hand investment, will enable joint working, bringing together services partnerships unified approach to SEND and inclusion, supporting improved around shared priorities and enabling more seamless support for outcomes for Cyp and families.

families.

Strategic co-production is a clear strength, with We will have invested in zone managers who will support schools to well-established principles of collaboration and transparency navigate zone support by triaging requests, allocating resources, tracking across the SEND partnership. Engagement structures have interventions and ensuring support is employed fairly and effectively enabled the involvement of families and their across the zone. Additionally, they will support the building of effective representatives, settings and partners in shaping Norfolk’s partnership working through leading their Zone Inclusion Partnerships, SEND reform plan, and there is a strong commitment to supporting the use of data, information and a reflective practice “co-production by default”. There is more to do, however, to approach.

ensure consistency of experience across all groups, We will have invested in expanding our SEND and Inclusion Model across particularly in reaching seldom-heard communities and early years and post-16, supporting improved partnership working as well strengthening feedback loops that demonstrate impact.

as providing a route to access expert support.

There is significant evidence of child and parent/carer voices Co-production and partnership working will be further embedded as core being captured and influencing statutory decision making, system behaviours. Norfolk will have strengthened its “co-production by but there is more to do to introduce the expectations of the default” approach, ensuring that Cyp, families and practitioners are White Paper across all parts of the system.

actively involved in shaping both strategy and delivery consistently across Deepening partnership working across education, health and the system. Engagement will be continuous, transparent and inclusive, care - particularly at local delivery level – with shared with greater focus on reaching seldom-heard groups accountability will be essential to sustaining momentum and and demonstrating how feedback directly informs change.

delivering system-wide change.

Enablers

Success Measures

Our key success measures have been identified to tell us, as a system, whether outcomes are improving, and underlying proxy indicators of whether we are meeting our goals of more children are having their needs met and flourishing in mainstream settings, and whether confidence of parents, carers and children & young people is improved.

Within its publications, the Government has predicted increasing EHCP and specialist placement numbers over the timeline of this plan. Norfolk’s targets for the identified success measures take this projection into consideration, as well as judging what is realistic based on our local position. Therefore, whilst stabilisation over the three years may appear unambitious, given recent trends locally and nationally, it would represent a significantly improved position.

Delivery remains dependent upon anticipated national action, such as control of the independent sector, as well as local action.

Achieving these success measures should lead to delivering better value for money and stabilisation of finances in the medium to longer term through the rebalancing of spend towards the mainstream sector and reduced reliance on independent sector placements, when combined with Government reforms.

Our key success measures will be supported by a suite of partnership agreed metrics aligned with our agreed JSNA priorities. Appendix B – Local Partnership Measures provides draft local metrics that will be considered by the partnership. Additionally, Schools Forum and the partnership will agree a set of local financial metrics to complement the non-financial metrics.

These measures are shown on academic years currently as this is how we count most of the data. It is expected that performance against the success measures will worsen in 2026/27, reflecting recent trends, before the impact of the reform plan and expanded Experts at Hand offer.

worker OTs, SaLTs, psychologists, nurses, specialist c. 300 Fte budgeted Specialist Teachers offer budgeted as posts (e.g. specialist outreach from teacher offer roles roles. This baseline is calculated upon the same Specialist Resource Bases and lived experienced principles as the Salt, Ot and EPs within the experts to support improved co-production and Norfolk’s workforce, as per the Operational and partnership working) and those roles that are not Outcome Data template.

included within this success measure (e.g. Zone Managers).

3. What is the local area partnership’s strategy for delivering?

Norfolk’s reform plan is informed by our Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, our local Partnership Maturity Assessment (see appendix C and D), and extensive partnership engagement (see appendix E). Its core premise is that strengthening mainstream inclusion and mobilising specialist expertise earlier and locally will reduce escalation, improve outcomes, and build system confidence and

sustainability.

Norfolk has established strong foundations, however, variability in mainstream inclusion remains, earlier and more accurate identification of needs is required, and Semh demand is higher than national comparators. Consequently, too many children are still exiting mainstream education, and parental confidence in the system is mixed.

To address this, the plan will put in place the following inputs:

• Strengthen shared data through the JSNA, zone data packs and partnership intelligence
• A refreshed universal offer, and effective graduated response, supported by investment in a

tool for all mainstream settings to support local expectations

• Significantly expand our Experts at Hand offer, building upon our SEND and Inclusion

Support Model, to expand multi-disciplinary expert capacity, including in early years and post-16

• Development of learning activities to increase expertise, understanding and awareness
• Continue capital investment in inclusion bases and support mainstream adaptations
• Complete implementation of our tiered AP model
• Strengthen partnership governance and shared responsibility
• Develop a co-production benchmark and strengthened system-wide “co-production by

default” approach Further detail regarding our plan, including our Experts at Hand Offer, is provided in Appendix F – Norfolk’s Proposed Expert at Hand Offer and Appendix G – High-Level Delivery Plan.

This should lead to the following outputs:

• Embedded zone collaboration, support and challenge, with the system taking collective

responsibility for inclusion

• Greater shared understanding of need and more accurate, earlier identification of needs
• A strengthened consistent, co-produced universal offer
• Strengthened inclusive practice through the Experts at Hand offer, which will increase

practitioner confidence in adapting curriculum, environment and teaching to prevent needs from escalating

• Strengthened engagement and co-production, building family confidence and trust in the

system As a result, we would expect a positive impact on outcomes; more children will have needs met earlier and locally, reducing escalation to statutory pathways, exclusions, children not on a school roll, and reliance on specialist or out-of-area provision. Mainstream settings will be more confident, have increased capability and be more consistent across Norfolk, with resources shifting towards earlier intervention.

Over time, the impact will be the development a sustainable, inclusive 0-25 system, where most children flourish in mainstream education, outcomes improve, parental confidence increases, and demand and cost pressures are reduced.

4. Local Partnership Maturity Assessment Tool

Appendix C is our Partnership Self-Assessment utilising the Maturity Assessment Tool Appendix D provides a high-level view of the responses from different partners within Norfolk’s partnership across the individual pillars, showing where partners have similar views and where there are differences of experiences. This has helped us to understand the different experience and perceptions of partners, which has informed, and will continue to inform, the work of our Local Inclusion Partnership and the development of our SEND reform plan.

5. What is the local area partnership’s road for the next 3 years?

A visual timeline for the proposed activity under each building block and the enablers is included in Appendix G (High-Level Delivery Plan).

Local Government Reorganisation vesting day is the 1 April 2028 for Norfolk, and whilst preparation has already commenced in 2026/27, this will significantly increase in 2027/28 with work required to disaggregate the local authority into the three, new unitary authorities, including our local SEND reform plan and experts at hand offer. Over the course of this plan, decision making will transfer to the new authorities.

2026/27 2027/28 2028/29

Building Block 1:

• Continue to co-produce our updated
• Annual, co-produced refresh of Norfolk
• Annual, co-produced refresh of Norfolk

Strengthening Norfolk frameworks for the new academic frameworks, incorporating National frameworks (including transitions), universal year, including our Ordinarily Available Inclusion Standards, when published incorporating National Inclusion inclusion core Provision (previously known as Provision

• Strengthen all transition pathways

Standards, when published offer across Expected at SEND Support (PEaSS)); including into adulthood, employment

• Ongoing review and refresh of

mainstream Individual Needs Descriptors in Education and supported internships redeveloped system graduated offer settings Settings (Indes); and Inclusion and

• Roll out redeveloped system graduated
• Maintain and optimise tool/support for

Provision Self-Evaluation Framework offer as part of Relational Practice (Ipsef). Keep under review to incorporate

• Continue rollout of Relational Practice

Framework (as part of our Experts at new development areas and national Framework, including rollout and Hand offer) changes, as they happen embedding of tool/support

• Launch transitions framework and updated
• Implementation and roll out of early
• Ongoing delivery of neurodiversity

materials needs and support mapping tool universal training, adapting and

• Complete graduated provision mapping and
• Sustain delivery of neurodiversity

refreshing approach as appropriate commence offer redevelopment, ensuring universal training

• Ongoing delivery of bitesize learning,

inclusion of early years and post-16

• Continue delivery of bitesize learning

adapting and refreshing approach as

• Implement a Norfolk Relational Practice

adapting and refreshing approach as appropriate Framework which incorporates trauma- appropriate informed practice, nurture principles and Norfolk STEPs, including procurement and initial rollout of tool/support for schools and settings, as part of our Experts at Hand offer.

• Develop early needs identification tool,

promoting early access to bespoke advice, guidance, self-care and further support for neurodiverse Cyp and their families

• Develop and roll-out neurodiversity

universal training

• Recruit capacity, as part of our Experts at

Hand offer, to develop and commence delivery of bitesize learning Building Block 2:

• Design expanded Expert at Hand workforce
• Continue recruitment and roll out of
• Fully embedded Experts at Hand offer

Enhancing and delivery model, including capacity to expert workforce including the targeted and targeted- targeted and support reintegration into full-time

• Advanced Practitioner roles support

plus offer targeted plus education and reduce Neet, to align with development activity e.g. designing

• MHSTs live across all schools

inclusion our expanded SEND and Inclusion Support delivery model, designing training,

• Mature reintegration, absence and

support model (building block 4) developing comms messaging Neet prevention pathways

• Undertake initial recruitment and
• Implementation of expanded Specialist
• Ongoing workforce optimisation and

procurement of additional expert capacity Outreach Advisory Service offer continuous improvement as part of our Experts at Hand offer,

• Full rollout of enhanced Steps offer

including Advanced Practitioner roles.

• Full rollout of targeted AP outreach
• Design expanded Specialist Outreach

(tier 1) Advisory Service offer, as part of our

• Potential roll-out of reintegration and

Experts at Hand offer severe absence models

• Design enhanced Steps offer, incorporating
• Implementation of neurodiversity

expanded trauma-informed training offer, assessment and diagnosis model recruit training roles as part of our Experts

• Continue Mhst rollout towards full

at Hand offer, and commence roll out coverage

• Pilot targeted AP outreach (tier 1)
• Respond to evaluation of effectiveness
• Pilot reintegration and severe absence

of Enhanced SEND Provisions (support models, evaluating impact bases) and continue development of

expected trends and monitoring approaches

• Recruit additional enabling capacity

(communications, transformation and leadership, system mapping, insight & analytics, learning & development)

• Refresh governance as a system to ensure

that we have partnership level oversight of our Local First Inclusion plan (which will incorporate our local SEND reform plan)

• Establish our partnership set of metrics for

monitoring progress with delivery of the plan The introduction to the Success Measures part of section 2 (Where the local area partnership expects to be in the next three years), provides further detail regarding the rationale for the choice of success measures for Norfolk and the additional local metrics.

Please note: this road map will be updated in the light of any new DfE guidance, our self-evaluation of progress and local government review.

Measure 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29

Provision that supports all needs: Increased proportion of Cyp on mainstream 86.30% 86.60% 87.30% school rolls (including Specialist Resource Bases) Inclusivity and infrastructure: 5.71% 5.43% 5.24% Reduction in Neet rates for post-16 Yp Rising demand: 1.34% 1.31% 1.22% Reduced requests for special school provision School absence and exclusions: Persistent: Severe: Persistent: Severe: Persistent: Severe: Reduction of persistent and severe absence 17.80% 3.02% 17.30% 2.90% 17.10% 2.75% rates Early identification and support: Experts at Hand detailed planning to be completed. The figures do not represent the total Experts at Hand Increased availability of experts per Cyp resource due to elements that have not been budgeted as posts (e.g. specialist outreach from Specialist Full-service offer being developed, but to Resource Bases and lived experienced experts to support improved co-production and partnership include fully qualified and assistant working) and those roles that are not included within this success measure (e.g. Zone Managers).

practitioner/support worker OTs, SaLTs, 50% of additional experts in post 80% of additional experts in post 95% of additional experts in post psychologists, nurses, specialist c. 54 Fte c. 87 Fte c. 103 Fte teachers/advisor /trainers, and youth We have presumed a 5% vacancy specialists rate considering the national workforce challenges identified, alongside normal turnover rates

6. What will the local area partnership deliver in the first year?

Norfolk’s programme will have four building blocks (workstreams), each with multiple projects and task and finish activities sitting underneath them. Appendix G (High-Level Delivery Plan) includes an overview of the projects and task and finish activities expected to be within each building block (workstream), sets out which are new initiatives as part of our SEND reform planning, and includes a visual timeline of proposed activity for each project. The table below shows a summary of milestones per building block (workstream) for 2026-7.

We have focussed our measures to track progress for each of the building blocks (workstreams) on our success measures. This is to ensure that our delivery is focussed on working towards delivering our core goals from our vision.

Some of the success measures identified are currently available on an annual basis (because the pattern is not linear during the year) or on a termly basis (as per DfE datasets). Therefore, we have had to assume a linear movement between annual, estimated trajectories to identify quarterly trajectories. Further work is needed to identify how to report current data sources on a quarterly basis. The 2026/27 quarterly trajectories are reflecting current trends as we will be establishing our new offer and do not expect the initial implementation to have impacted in this financial year, except for the availability of experts measure, which reflects current anticipated recruitment.

2026-27 Local delivery

Q2 Q3 Q4

plan

Building block/

Milestones Target

Milestones Target

Milestones

Target

Workstream outline

trajectory

trajectory

trajectory

Building Block

• Norfolk frameworks

Cyp on

• Update of Norfolk

Cyp on

• Graduated offer

Cyp on

(workstream) 1:

updated for new mainstream frameworks to reflect mainstream redevelopment mainstream

Strengthening universal

academic year school rolls: national inclusion school rolls: complete school rolls:

inclusion core offer across

including our 86.39% standards complete 86.35%

• Initial roll out of

86.30%

mainstream settings

Ordinarily Available

• Procurement of

relational approach Provision; Individual Absence relational approach Absence tool/support Absence Outcome: Our Needs Descriptors in Rates tool/support complete Rates complete Rates strengthened universal Education Settings - Persistent:

• Detailed definition of

- Persistent:

• Early needs

- Persistent: offer as a system will (Indes); and Inclusion 17.85% early needs 17.83% identification tool 17.80% mean that more children and Provision Self- - Severe: identification tool - Severe: built and testing - Severe: will have needs met in Evaluation Framework 2.99% complete 3.00% complete 3.02% mainstream settings (Ipsef).

• Initial delivery of
• Review of
• Transitions framework

neurodiversity training neurodiversity Success measures: launched complete training complete

• Increased proportion
• Graduated provision
• Bitesize learning plan
• Initial bitesize

of Cyp on mainstream mapping completed developed learning delivered in school rolls (including line with plan Specialist Resource

• Engagement with

Bases) partners on which

• Reduction of persistent

relational approach and severe absence tool/support to rates commission undertaken

• Early needs

identification tool blueprint complete

• Capacity recruited to

deliver bitesize learning activity

Building Block

• Advanced Practitioner

Cyp on

• Detailed design of

Cyp on

• Tender for

Cyp on

(workstream) 2:

roles recruited mainstream experts required and mainstream additional expert at mainstream

Enhancing targeted and

• Nd assessment/

school rolls: delivery model school rolls: hands capacity school rolls:

targeted plus inclusion

diagnosis model 86.39% complete 86.35% complete 86.30%

support

blueprint produced

• Contract variation for
• Additional experts in
• Mapping of existing

Availability additional experts at Availability post Availability Outcome: Increased ESPs complete of Experts: hand capacity complete of Experts:

• Pilot of Soas offers

of Experts: confidence and capability

• Additional experts in

37 Fte complete 54 Fte of mainstream settings to post meet a wider range of Neet rate:

• Delivery vehicle for

Neet rate:

• Pilot of re-

Neet rate: needs, reducing both 5.52% support for re- 5.62% integration into 5.71% escalation to statutory integration/reduction of specialist and AP pathways and the number Absence Neet agreed.

Absence complete - decision Absence of children leaving Rates

• Additional re-

Rates on roll-out taken Rates mainstream provision - Persistent: integration/Neet - Persistent:

• Evaluation of

- Persistent: 17.85% reduction roles in post 17.83% effectiveness of 17.80% Success measures: - Severe:

• Design of expanded

- Severe: existing ESPs - Severe:

• Increased proportion

2.99% Soas model complete 3.00% complete 3.02% of Cyp on mainstream

• Additional STEPs

school rolls (including training roles recruited Specialist Resource

• Enhanced STEPs offer

Bases) designed

• Increased availability
• AP Tier 1 trauma

of experts per Cyp informed training offer (includes Ot, Salt, delivered specialist community

• Impact of severe

Ph nurses, absence pilot evaluated psychologists, Mh – decision on roll-out leads (e.g. nurse, Ot, taken Sw, senior Cwp) – fully qualified and

• Impact of reintegration

assistant practitioners) pilot evaluated –

• Reduction in Neet

decision on roll-out rates for post-16 Yp taken

• Reduction of persistent
• Design for re-

and severe absence integration into rates specialist and AP pilot

• Reduced requests for

complete special school

• Detailed design of Nd

provision assessment/diagnosis model complete

Building Block

• 1 additional Ship open

Cyp on

• Draft criteria for

Cyp on

• Criteria and

Cyp on

(workstream) 3: Access to

• 1 additional Semh

mainstream targeting of future mainstream approach tested mainstream

specialist provision

base open school rolls: funding for mainstream school rolls: with Norfolk school rolls:

• Riba Stage 1 complete

86.39% settings established 86.35% education system 86.30% Outcome: Increased for Tier 3 AP (Inclusive Mainstream and targeted specialist provision Requests Infrastructure) Requests for applications invited Requests for available within Further details of bases for special

• 1 additional Ship open

special from settings for special mainstream settings and opening are provided in school

• 5 additional Asd bases

school investment school delivery of agreed special Appendix H.

provision: open provision: (Inclusive provision: school expansion, 1.29% 1.31% 1.34% reducing escalation to

• 2 additional Semh

Mainstream independent specialist bases open Infrastructure) and out-of-area provision

• Riba Stage 2 complete
• 1 additional Ship

for Tier 3 AP open Success measures:

• 1 additional Asd
• Increased proportion

bases open of Cyp on mainstream

• 5 additional Semh

school rolls (including bases open Specialist Resource

• Detailed planning

Bases) undertaken for Tier

• Reduced requests for

3 AP special school

• Riba Stage 3

provision complete for Ryston Special School and Unity Special School

Building Block

• EHCP impact survey

Cyp on

• Co-production offer

Cyp on

• Implementation of

Cyp on

(workstream) 4:

complete and findings mainstream developed with people mainstream post-16 elements of mainstream

Enhancing coproduction

reviewed school rolls: with lived experience school rolls: SEND and Inclusion school rolls:

and partnerships

86.39%

• Co-production

86.35% Support Model 86.30% benchmark agreed complete Outcome: Increase in Requests

• Resource to deliver co-

Requests for

• Implementation of

Requests for parent/carer and for special production offer agreed special Early Years elements special professional confidence, school

• Recruitment of zone

school of the SEND and school with more children provision: managers as part of provision: Inclusion Support provision: supported in mainstream 1.29% experts at hand offer 1.31% Model complete 1.34% provision and reducing complete.

• SEND pathways

demand for specialist

• Design of post-16

training delivered provision.

elements of SEND and

• Detailed design of

Inclusion Support further activities to Success measures: Model complete improve SEND

• Increased proportion
• Design of Early Years

pathways complete of Cyp on mainstream elements of the SEND school rolls (including and Inclusion Support Specialist Resource Model complete Bases)

• SEND pathways
• Reduced requests for

communication strategy special school developed provision The table below shows that anticipated Experts at Hand grant funding based upon the high-level service design undertaken and will be refined as detailed design, delivery and implementation planning is undertaken. These posts and spend is in addition to our existing commitments, which will continue and form part our Experts at Hand offer.

Due to the timeline for job design and recruitment activity, we do not expect to incur any significant expenditure from the Experts at Hand grant funding until quarter 3.

As a result of the anticipated timeline, the total projected spend is less than our grant allocation. However, under the published grant conditions, Norfolk would expect to fully utilise the 2026-27 allocation in advance of September 2027.

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

As a large council, we have effective support capacity that can work alongside key partners to provide the infrastructure to enable delivery of the plan. Alongside this core infrastructure, the council already has an established transformation programme, with transformation embedded as a way of working within Children’s Service. To support its delivery, the LA has invested significant resource in key enabling functions, such as transformation resource, finance, Hr, commissioning, digital, communications, legal and insight and analytics.

We will expand and refresh our existing programme to incorporate the additional elements of the SEND reform plan. Alongside this, we are reviewing our overall programme governance to move from a LA-focussed approach to partnership-led programme governance in accordance with our strengthening Local Inclusion Partnership (see Section 4 – Governance).

To support the additional elements of the refreshed programme, we will strengthen programme and project delivery capacity so that implementation is well planned, appropriately prioritised and supported by effective use of resources. We have included an element of additional support to be funded through the transformation portion of Experts at Hand funding, including funding for leadership capacity to sponsor key activity, additional project management capacity to drive forward workstreams, additional insight, analytics and reporting resource to support the partnership as a whole and to understand the impact of change, additional commissioning capacity, communications resource to ensure there is awareness of new approaches and that these are appropriately embedded, and learning and development capacity to support upskilling of the system workforce.

Over recent years, the significant investment in reporting capabilities has enabled the development of dashboard and data packs to support operational and strategic decision making. The additional insight, analytics & reporting capacity will strengthen this approach, ensuring that approaches developed are evidence-based and that clear methodologies for monitoring impact are in place.

8. Other funding

Block transfers

For 2026–27, Norfolk determined that continuing a block transfer would not effectively support system-wide inclusion or financial sustainability. Historically, the transfer was intended to address rising high needs demand and deficits; however, it had not delivered its intended benefits. Instead, it had created inefficiencies, whereby funding was being removed from mainstream budgets and subsequently redistributed back to schools through Element 3 funding. This circular approach did not incentivise inclusive practice, nor resulted in stability or certainty of funding for schools to utilise to plan effective SEND provision.

Removing the transfer enabled all of the Schools Block funding to remain within mainstream budgets, improving financial certainty and allowing schools to plan provision more effectively. This change responded directly to feedback from Dsg consultations with Norfolk’s schools over a number of years as well as from Norfolk’s Schools Forum – schools requested greater control and stability in their core funding arrangements, and to receive the funding they were national expected to receive.

The approach also strengthens accountability for SEND support within mainstream settings.

By ensuring schools receive their maximum core funding with increased Notional SEN budgets, resources are more clearly aligned with pupil need and support a shared responsibility for inclusion across the system. This is consistent with Norfolk’s Local First Inclusion priorities and wider SEND and Alternative Provision strategy.

Overall, ending the block transfer simplified funding flows, reduced administrative complexity, and supports a more coherent, sustainable and inclusive local system, while maintaining the total level of resource available for SEND provision.

Capital

Norfolk’s high needs capital strategy sits within our Local First Inclusion transformation programme and is designed to shift the system towards inclusive mainstream provision, meeting all needs in mainstream wherever possible, including through inclusion bases, and limiting special school growth beyond that committed prior to the publication of the Schools White paper where clear sufficiency gaps were identified. It builds upon significant investment by the LA, and previous Hnca, including to develop our inclusion base model in mainstream schools.

• Inclusion at the core of sufficiency strategy (0–25)

Norfolk has a long-established inclusion base model (Specialist Resource Bases) and a strong mainstream infrastructure offer (including funding for to support high needs regardless of whether a child has an EHCP and for Enhanced SEND Provisions). These provisions have a proven track record of supporting children with complex needs to stay in the mainstream sector when they might otherwise have moved into special school provision, without the need for capital investment. Whilst accounting for category variation, longitudinal data for time-limited bases demonstrates that SRBs have around an 85% success rate in retaining children in mainstream 12 months on. Those in long- term bases are supported to remain in mainstream when otherwise highly likely to require special school places.

• Every child who needs an inclusion base can access one, c. £42m investment1

Our planned programme significantly expands inclusion base capacity and is built from detailed needs analysis and place planning. Planned Srb growth includes:

• SHIPs (global developmental delay KS1–2): net +144 places (to 208)
• Autism/C&I SRBs (KS1–KS4): net +156 places (to 418)
• Semh SRBs Tier 2 (Primary): net +72 places (to 198)
• Semh SRBs Tier 2 (Secondary): net +276 places (to 308)

By the end of the planned programme, Norfolk will have doubled mainstream base availability; 40% of primary schools will host SRBs/ESPs and over half of secondary schools will host SRBs. These provisions will, together, ensure all schools have access to a provision in their area of Norfolk.

1 This value aligns with Appendix J (Operational and Outcome Data Template), but it is different to the value in Appendix H (Strategic Capital and Specialist Provision Plan), due to the appendix showing totals split on a scheme basis rather than financial year basis, with those not fully completed by end of 2025/26 showing in the future schemes.

• Fewer Cyp travelling long distances for suitable placements

Place planning explicitly targets geographical gaps and travel pressures, having previously delivered evidenced home to school transport savings with further savings committed (cumulative c. £2m by March 2028). We are addressing defined cold spots through new provision in Great Yarmouth (Ld) and west Norfolk (autism/C&I), reducing reliance on distant and high-cost placements. Our AP three-tier model keeps pupils connected to mainstream wherever safe, with Tier 2 provision delivered through school-hosted Semh SRBs to prevent escalation to Tier 3.

• Improved suitability of the mainstream estate, c. £5m investment

In addition to Inclusion bases, we will also embed the recently piloted Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure (Imi) to improve mainstream environments through targeted, match-funded adaptations aligned to accessibility strategies and pupil need. Imi creates a scalable pipeline of mainstream adaptations and prioritises schools hosting ESPs where accommodation currently constrains inclusive delivery for higher-need pupils. The fund will support both the creation of specific provisions within mainstreams schools and other adaptations to the mainstream estate to support children with SEND to flourish. This fund will support the early year and post-16 sectors where appropriate. Our strategic intent is that a significant proportion of any future Hn capital allocations will be used to expand this further.

Special and Alternative Provision expansion and rationale

Where we are increasing special school/AP capacity, this was planned prior to the publication of the Schools White Paper and the rationale is that existing demand cannot be met through bases alone due to complexity, capacity pressure and geographical cold spots, evidenced through local needs analysis and tribunal direction. For AP, we are expanding registered Tier 3 capacity via a Uet Compass satellite to reduce reliance on non-school AP under section 19, via local investment with DfE high needs capital reserved exclusively for increasing mainstream base places.

Our full SEND Capital Strategy, with a breakdown of how our High Needs Capital Allocation funding is being spent, is set out in Appendix H (Strategic Capital and Specialist Provision Plan).

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

In Norfolk, we are committed to stakeholder engagement and co-production; our approach is rooted in the principle of co-production by default, continuous engagement, and shared accountability across the SEND system. We use the Lundy Model as our approach to participation, and our Local Offer details our existing approach to participation and co-production.

System partners, Cyp and families have had significant input into the development of our initial SEND reform plan – see Appendix E (Summary of Engagement) for further details. As we further develop and implement our plan, we will continue to work collaboratively. Engagement will be structured around key principles:

• Continuous engagement: Cyp and parent carers are involved at each stage of

design, delivery and review, ensuring plans are reflective of lived experience.

• System-wide ownership: Partners have opportunity to contribute to shaping and delivering

reforms, ensuring collective responsibility. This will be achieved via targeted engagement events, as well as Local Inclusion Partnership meetings.

• Transparency and feedback: Clear feedback loops will ensure stakeholders can clearly see

how their input influences decisions.

Engagement and co-production will involve Cyp, parent/carers, settings (across all age ranges), and other partners and will specifically focus on:

• Building on our existing approach, our Local Inclusion Partnership have agreed that we will

have a minimum co-production benchmark which should ensure that co-production is:

• Purposeful and transparent
• Inclusive and accessible to all – including seldom heard
• Building into key decision points in a child or young person’s life
• Adopted by the whole system
• Embedded in everyday practice
• Accountable, clear evidence that co-production shapes outcome
• Developing an offer from those with lived experience to support partners to further develop

how the voices of both Cyp and parent carers are captured directly and distinctly, with clear evidence of how their views influence decisions.

• Implementing our initial plan alongside developing further iterations as progress is made

and new guidance is released.

The LA will continue to commission an independent Mediation and Disagreement Resolution (Mdr) service to support Cyp with SEND, and their parent carers with education, health and care matters.

A core facet of this service is enabling the voice of Cyp and parent carers to be heard and acted upon, and our commissioning performance monitoring approach ensures this functioning effectively. Additional monitoring will be developed to focus on timeliness (end-to-end case tracking), resolution rates (informal vs formal and post-mediation outcomes), and effectiveness (reduced escalation and improved early resolution), supported by existing provider data and wider Lfi Kpi reporting. Further details on the service and how it captures Cyp and parent carer voice are provided in Appendix I (Mediation and Sendiass).

Norfolk’s Sendiass will also continue to be available to support Cyp and parent carers with high- quality, independent information and guidance, with structures and practice in place that ensure impartiality. Further detail as to how Norfolk’s service mitigates any parental concerns about perceived independence, responds to areas of development, and embeds the minimum service standards is included in Appendix I (Mediation and Sendiass).

The Schools White Paper sets an expectation that schools and local partners collaborate in responding to the reforms and in delivering the best possible support to children with SEND. Norfolk already has a number of forums which create collaboration across the sector, examples of which include our SENDCo forum, Norfolk School Leaders Association, Ceo Forum, LA Maintained Leaders, Norfolk Association of Special School Heads (Nassh), Schools Forum with High Needs Block Working Group, Early Years Consultative Group, and Post 16 Education, Training and Strategy group.

Additionally, through our local Zone Inclusion Partnerships (Zip), established in 15 geographies across the County (see Appendix A), we have already facilitated local education leaders coming together to discuss the opportunities and challenges around SEND; look at data and evidence; share best practice; and reflect on what is working well and where there are gaps in the zone’s support offer.

Additionally, in the secondary sector, we have established local planning partnerships where schools work together to prevent children from being excluded from school, supporting and challenging one another, facilitating voluntary transitions where children need a fresh start and, going forward, managing shared access to time-limited secondary Semh provisions that support re-integration into mainstream school.

The work is still maturing, and we will seek to further it through the delivery of this plan, including considering how zone partnerships might formally pool funding/resources and take on a fuller commissioning role with oversight of the experts at hand and wider offer in each area. This will include supporting the strengthening of our collective, universal offer. We recognise that the design of these arrangements needs an element of flexibility as academy trusts often want to pool resources within their own trust, rather than on a geographical basis. However, our collective view is that it is important to compliment intra-trust collaboration with zone partnerships that operate to community footprints and facilitate co-operation and challenge between trusts and schools that might otherwise be missed.

Norfolk partners and families would appreciate clarity regarding the other proposed changes in the White Paper and that formed part of the SEND reform consultation at the earliest opportunity, including timelines. This is to enable the partnership to effectively prepare and plan for future change with sufficient time to fully co-produce local solutions.

10. Risks and Mitigations

The most significant risk to the local area is that the High Needs Stability Grant is not received, which would result in a significant financial challenge that would need to be addressed by the local authority. Among other things, this would be likely to require LA expenditure to be pared back to statutory duties, which, in turn, would lead to the need to reduce or remove previous revenue and capital investment made to support transformation of Norfolk’s SEND and AP system, which are assumed to continue in this plan. However, this is not, at this stage, a risk to delivery of the plan itself and is, therefore, not covered in the table below.

There is a risk that we will be unable to recruit and 4 4 R We have sought to mitigate the risk by A 3 3 resource sufficient expertise to fully resource our identifying a graduated resource profile Experts at Hand plan due to national shortages of alongside a wide range of expertise that can key professionals. This would lead to education work together effectively bringing different settings not receiving identified support to enable but complimentary skillsets. We will them to increase inclusion, resulting in the aims of closely monitor the recruitment process and, the plan not being met.

where it appears that posts cannot be filled in a timely fashion, we will consider alternative delivery models and be agile where we need to be to ensure we deploy sufficient resource quickly enough. However, significant risk will remain if Government requirements significantly limits the types of roles and skillsets the grant is able to be spent, at the same time as all local areas seeking similar resource where there are known workforce shortages.

There is a risk that due to the size and scale of the 4 3 A We have introduced, and will continue to A 4 2 Norfolk system, not all partners are equally make use of, a range of forums (Cypsa, Lip, engaged in local partnership working due to Zone Inclusion Partnerships, Strategic trust differing governance, approaches and priorities.

meetings, team around the school) to bring This would reduce the benefit that could be together partners from strategic to delivered through the SEND reform plan.

operational levels to agree shared principles and joint ways of working. We will further embed co-production as default, so the partnership is fully engaged in shaping any SEND reform activities.

There is a risk that lack of urgent Government 5 3 R We will continue to engage with the A 4 2 action to prevent further growth and cost control in Government to identify and implement the independent sector will perpetuate an controls at the earliest opportunity inconsistent offer for Cyp that reduces the impact and takes steps that we can locally to reduce of the partnership’s work to increase inclusion in expansion and new growth. Implementation mainstream and results in increasing cost of our reform plan will further support pressures.

mainstream inclusion wherever possible to reduce demand for specialist provision. We will maintain robust commissioning arrangements to ensure that fees are as low as possible.

There is a risk that timelines for developing and 4 3 A The partnership will continue to engage with G 3 2 delivering the SEND reform plan are not sufficient central Government to establish expectations to allow for thorough co-production and design and timelines as early as possible so that we activities, or to build a sustainable model that can can build in appropriate activities to ensure be delivered within funding windows. This would our plan is as impactful as possible and meets lead to disengagement from partners and would Government requirements.

limit the impact experienced by children and young Following on from the high levels of people from the SEND reforms.

engagement activity in the initial plan, the partnership will proactively plan to co-produce delivery and iterations of our plan as set out in section 9.

11. Dependencies

Our SEND reform plan will be managed as a whole-system change programme and the Local Inclusion Partnership will act as the key governance forum to align resource and tie the various programmes together. Nevertheless, we will need to be mindful of specific dependencies: Our plan includes a substantial focus on early years and, as such, we are aligning SEND reform activity and investment with the Best Start Programme. We are intending to use SEND reforms funding to establish a ‘team around the setting’ approach in early years, utilising Best Start monies to enhance roles which can be accessed via that model. We are also embedding our model into the future specification of the Healthy Child Programme to ensure join up with that contract.

We are seeking to align the SEND reform plan to the NHS Neighbourhood working agenda. We have proposed that children, and in particular ‘keeping children in mainstream school’, is an identified priority for that neighbourhood agenda and are seeking to align the new NHS funding/resource to our SEND reform plan and to incorporate NHS teams within our ‘team around the school’ as part of pioneering the neighbourhood approach.

Our longer-term aspiration is for early social care support to be accessed within zones, closely linked to our team around the school, and we are therefore taking opportunities to align our SEND reform plan with Families First, Family Help and multi-agency safeguarding changes, especially where children have overlapping needs, so that families experience one coherent system. We are currently undertaking design activity to set out how we want our end-to-end system of support for children to function and will seek to work towards this vision.

The Government’s ambition and policy agenda for a full trust-led landscape represents a complex dependency. Positively, this agenda might support all schools to form into collaborative groups, share resources and support shared learning and practice. It can also potentially simplify accountability and support more consistency across the mainstream system. However, there are also risks, with the footprint of existing and future trusts not always matching the idea of ‘local natural communities’, creating a risk of confusion between Norfolk zones and the natural desire of trusts to operate within their own direct influence. Equally, it will be challenging to ensure that the debate about governance status and how a new trust landscape is formed does not detract from the core of the SEND reform agenda. To mitigate this risk, we have already begun a proactive dialogue with the sector to ensure the SEND agenda is fully considered in developing the future trust landscape.

Local Government Reorganisation poses by far the most substantial challenge to the Norfolk programme, absorbing a substantial level of leadership capacity in all parts of the system and requiring transformational change to disaggregate the existing arrangements into three areas.

Delivering SEND reform alongside the Lgr programme will be hugely stretching. The other key risk is that the three new authorities set different paths forward for SEND arrangements, creating inconsistency of experiences for children and complexity for families, schools and wider stakeholders. Schools have been clear that they do not welcome Lgr and want a consistent Norfolk operating model. We will attempt to mitigate this risk by ensuring that the detailed design work for our SEND reform plan is mindful of the planned move to a three unitary model wherever possible, but the risk of fragmentation and delay is very real.

Section 3: Monitoring and Evaluation

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

The SEND Reform programme will be monitored and evaluated through a structured, partnership- wide approach that combines regular performance tracking, qualitative feedback, and clear governance arrangements. This will complement the quarterly reporting to Government. Our intention is to ensure that delivery remains evidence-led, responsive to local need, and focused on improving outcomes for Cyp.

We have already developed LA operational dashboards providing live oversight, alongside termly zone and trust-level data packs used to monitor progress. These contain relevant metrics to support oversight of the new plan.

Utilising additional insight and analytics resource in our Experts at Hand plan, we will seek to expand this approach to include health and other partnership data, utilising Family Connect as a model (a dashboard that brings together information about children and families, including from partners, informing early support).

Our five success measures will be the cornerstone of oversight of the plan, alongside a suite of partnership metrics aligned with JSNA priorities that will be developed with Lip.

On an operational basis, relevant teams will review data regularly to identify emerging trends in demand, flag delivery issues, and support timely problem-solving. At a strategic level, regular review of KPIs will be undertaken and presented to Lip and Cypsa. This will enable leaders to make informed decisions about prioritisation, resource allocation, service delivery, and corrective action, where required.

We capture the voice of the Cyp and their families through a variety of routes, which inform all levels of our monitoring and evaluation. This includes surveys, feedback forms, social media engagement, SEND youth forum, Making Sense of SEND events, co-production and participation groups, and via our Parent Carer Forum.

These existing routes will continue to be used to seek feedback on the progress of our plan, and we will look to expand engagement routes through additional communications resource funded by Experts at Hand. Additionally, we will invest in parent/carer experts to support the development of co-production in settings, providing an additional feedback channel.

Our established SEND Multi-Agency Assurance Group (Smaag) undertakes assurance activity which incorporates the voice of Cyp and families and will continue to provide oversight as to the quality of services.

Our existing multi-agency monitoring and oversight includes:

• Cypsa, where inclusion is one of four priorities
• Cypsa Joint Strategic Analysis Group (data sub-group) that steers the partnerships’ data

priorities supported by a dedicated role to provide analysis and insight

• Lip (subgroup of Cypsa) that receives Smaag reports and Cyp and family voice

in all meetings

• Statutory bodies’ governance, i.e. Icb Board and LA’s Cabinet and Select Committee (scrutiny

role), that receive regular reports regarding SEND and AP improvement

• The LA has an established transformation programme with an oversight board in

place and Lip has a progress board to monitor delivery of actions identified through our current SEND and AP improvement strategy. Going forward, we will combine our improvement work in one plan and combine the oversight boards, with reporting into Lip.

13. Reporting to the DfE

Our Local SEND Reform Plan Data Template is attached as Appendix J. For the purpose of this modelling, we have assumed that Norfolk’s growth in EHCP will be slower than the national predicted growth due to Norfolk’s comparatively high starting point and recent trends in EHC assessment requests (which differ from much of the national picture).

We have also undertaken scenario modelling in relation to EHCP numbers for a range of assumptions with respect to Norfolk’s growth versus the national predicted growth:

• Scenario 1 – Growth in EHCP rate slows in Norfolk and meets national rate by 2029 (7.7% in

2029)

• Scenario 2 – Growth in EHCP rate slows in Norfolk but slightly exceeds national rate by 2029

(7.95% in 2029)

• Scenario 3 – Growth in EHCP rate continues in Norfolk but at a slower rate and remains at a

higher rate than national (8.2% in 2029)

• Scenario 4 – Growth in EHCP rate continues at same pace as national projections (+2.4% to

9% by 2029) This scenario modelling is available in Appendix K. We have used scenario 2 for our data template.

Section 4: Governance

14. How will the local area partnership ensure delivery remains on track?

We are in the process of evolving our governance to reflect a more cohesive approach and to improve partnership-wide oversight and ownership of our SEND and AP improvement. The governance shown below reflects either existing, adapted or proposed arrangements in line with this evolution.

Proposed terms of reference will need to be agreed by the respective groups.

Sara Touch, Executive Director of Children’s Services for Norfolk County Council, will be the Senior Responsible Officer.

Governance

Purpose/Responsibilities Membership Cadence Decision Rights Escalation Route

mechanism

Children and Young

• To develop and agree

Chaired by Sara Tough, Minimum of bi- Cypsa is not a N/A

People Strategic

strategic priorities and Dcs (SEND Reform Plan monthly separate legal entity

Alliance (Cypsa)

ensure delivery of a Children Sro) and, as such, is unable and Young People to take decisions Partnership Strategy.

Leaders and senior separately from the

• To monitor system impact

representatives with membership.

and outcomes.

appropriate decision- Cypsa functions as a

• To fulfil a leadership role for

making responsibility forum for system enabling collaborative from: leadership and working across the children collaboration to and young people’s system.

Local Authorities

achieve the Flourish

• To take account of and
• Children’s Services

outcomes framework.

inform strategic

• Finance

This will be supported commissioning and

• District Councils

by discussion of issues transformation programmes

• Public Health

with the aim of to help ensure best use of

• Adult Social Services

reaching consensus resources and maximising of

• Norfolk Fire & Rescue

among members. To opportunities for alignment.

Service support delivery of

• To ensure and promote co-
• Community

these outcomes, production with service Information and Cypsa have identified users and stakeholders.

Learning Services four priorities

• To advocate on behalf of

including one relating children and young people

Health Sector

SEND and inclusion.

within wider partnerships

• Norfolk & Waveney

and boards.

Icb

• Norfolk and Suffolk

Foundation Trust

• Ecch NHS Trust – Cyp

Services

• Gp Clinical Lead for

NHS Primary Care

• Norfolk & Norwich

University Hospital NHS Trust

• Queen Elizabeth

Hospital NHS Trust

• James Paget

University Hospital NHS Trust

Education Sector

• Head Teachers

representing primary, secondary and special schools’ networks

• Principal/Ceo

representing post 16 Education providers

Criminal Justice Sector

• Norfolk Constabulary
• Office of the Police

and Crime Commissioner

• Bedfordshire,

Cambridgeshire & Norfolk Prison Group

• Norfolk and Suffolk

Probation Service

Communities Sector

• Vcse Forum
• Momentum Norfolk
• DWP
• Housing Providers

Service User

representatives

• Family Voice Norfolk
• Healthwatch
• Cyp Representatives

(indirectly)

Safeguarding

Partnerships

• Norfolk Safeguarding

Children Partnership

• Norfolk Safeguarding

Adults Board Other members may be co-opted as necessary.

Local Inclusion Members work collaboratively

• Children’s Services

Half termly with Agree partnership Cypsa Partnership to:

• Adult Social Services

extraordinary actions

• fulfil the ambitions of the
• LA Finance

meetings when Norfolk Area SEND and AP

• Public Health

partnership sign- Strategy (Nasaps)

• Icb

off or

• meet statutory
• Norfolk and Suffolk

engagement is responsibilities for Cyp with NHS Foundation Trust required SEND and those who need

• East of England

AP Community Health and Care NHS Trust

• improve outcomes and
• Family Voice Norfolk

deliver the improvement (Pcf) ambitions for Cyp in Norfolk

• Voluntary Sector
• respond to the Joint
• Norfolk Autism

Strategic Needs Assessment Partnership and the strategic Local First

• Norfolk Governor

Inclusion Plan.

Network

• Norfolk School

Responsibilities of Lip Members: Leaders Association

• To understand and
• Maintained

implement the national Mainstream Heads priorities, policies and

• Early Years

reforms, responding to Consultative Group national and regional

• Schools Forum

boards.

• Norfolk Association of
• To participate in dialogue

Special School Heads with national and regional

• Further Education

boards as required, ensuring

• Academy Trusts

that National Standards for (vacant) SEND and AP are implemented.

• To have strategic oversight of

the actions, outcomes and impact indicators and recommendations for change made by the Lip

• To set the strategy, oversee

progress and agree significant changes to the Local First Inclusion Plan and associated SEND reform plan

• Oversight of metrics and

reports (financial and non- financial) to DfE

• To ensure our Local First

Inclusion Plan directly links to the priorities set out in the Norfolk Area SEND and AP Strategy (Nasaps) and contribute to the Flourish ambitions.

• To actively support the Lfi

Plan, informed by the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, SEND survey, stakeholder feedback, and system-wide insights.

• To ensure that the Nasap

Strategy is underpinned and informed by the views of Cyp, parent carers and the professionals who support them as set out in Norfolk’s Participation Strategy

• To respond proactively to

the findings of the SEND Multi Agency Assurance Group (Smaag)

• To monitor actions,

outcomes and impact indicators, and to agree partnership actions

• To support the local area to

analyse and evaluate its progress in implementing the Children and Families Act 2014, the Care Act 2014.

• To demonstrate a clear

understanding of how effective the local area is in supporting children and young people with SEND to have good outcomes.

Local First Inclusion

• Local First Inclusion Plan and
• Sub-set of Lip

Monthly/bi- To approve / reject Local Inclusion Plan (Lfip) associated SEND reform plan Members, or relevant monthly business cases Partnership Management Board alternates to

2 Financial decisions will need to be considered having had pre-agreement in principle by the organisation(s) responsible for the funding

particular focus on early years, primary, financial metrics secondary, special

• Supported by the High

schools and alternative Needs Block Working Group provision (including a cross-section of academies and maintained schools), and post-16.

LA and Icb will maintain appropriate governance in relation to their respective constitutions, including appropriate revenue and capital funding decisions, monitoring of spend and associated appropriate action, and completion of necessary Government returns.

Section 5: Central Government Support

15. How can we help you?

Central government can support Norfolk’s ambitions in the following ways:

• Most straightforwardly, we ask Government to prioritise delivery of the two new special

schools in Norfolk. These places are badly needed and vital to the credibility of the programme with the sector and our efforts to reduce reliance on higher-cost independent sector provision.

• Government support in curtailing the expansion of the independent specialist sector will

also be vital. This includes delivery of the proposed national reforms for the independent sector, at speed. In the short term, action is needed to block new provisions being established outside of our agreed local strategy; this includes robust conversations with academy trusts and other stakeholders involved in potential schemes.

• Government can support local areas by ensuring Experts at Hand funding can be used

flexibly to fund a wide range of roles that can deliver the overall aims of the investment whilst reflecting workforce challenges as well as considering the individual needs of different local areas and their different starting points, including existing services and previous, local investment.

• Central and regional Government teams could significantly strengthen the impact of our

programme by holding schools and academy trusts to account for their engagement. Not all trusts are equally engaged in local partnership working and, where this is the case, the DfE could play a substantial role in achieving behaviour change.

• Government could make an impact by supporting the allocation of additional NHS funding to

address waiting lists for NDD assessment. This is an identified local priority but is not yet supported by ringfenced funding.

• Government could facilitate peer support and shared learning. Highly inclusive trusts/

schools could be engaged to complement our local outreach offer, offering mentoring and demonstrating the art of the possible to local leaders. LAs and ICBs could also be supported to learn from equivalents in other areas.

Appendix A – Analysis of Need and Existing SEND and Inclusion Support Model Infrastructure

Analysis of Need

Norfolk’s Joint Strategic Needs Assessment

• Our SEND Norfolk Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) brings together local data and the national data we're legally required to report on to give a full picture of special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) in Norfolk relating to children and young people from 0-25.

• It includes the voices of children, families and professionals from the SEND Survey 2025.

• Norfolk SEND Joint Strategic Needs Assessment - Introduction - Norfolk County Council

• Our needs analysis identified seven priority areas:

SEND – Analysis of Needs (Norfolk)

Needs data from Identification of Needs Descriptors in Education Settings (Indes) - Cyp with SEND with and without an EHCP

• Our JSNA highlights higher rates of Semh identified as the primary need than the national average, but lower levels for autism • Our Indes data shows that the two thirds of Cyp identified with SEND have co-occurring needs

Zones and SEND & Inclusion Support Model

Norfolk’s Existing Zone Infrastructure

Broadland (South)

North Norfolk

Norwich (North)

Kings Lynn & West Norfolk (Cen)

Broadland North

Great Yarmouth (North)

Breckland North

Broadland (East)

Kings Lynn & West Norfolk (Sw)

South Norfolk (North East)

Breckland South

Great Yarmouth (South)

South Norfolk (South)

South Norfolk (North West)

Norwich (South)

Existing SEND & Inclusion Support Model

15 new School and Community Teams

Dedicated phoneline for parents and professionals

Aligns 150 practitioners to multi-disciplinary Zone Teams

Ceased traded Ep services

Underpinned by school, zone and trust data packs allowing

evidence-based

conversations

All schools have had at least

two Tas meetings

All ZIPs are in operation

Appendix B – Local Partnership Metrics

We will agree local metrics to measure our progress that link to each of our JSNA priorities

It is proposed that metrics are developed based upon the following topics and that these metrics will be used to monitor factors that are expected to contribute to delivery against our JSNA priorities:

Rising Demand

• Reduced requests for EHCPs
• Reduced requests for special school provision
• Reduced requests for health diagnosis assessments
• Reduced referrals for health support resulting in re-signposting to other provision due to being unable to meet need

School absence and exclusions

• Reduced in permanent exclusions
• Reduction of persistent and severe absence rates
• Reduction in home schooling where parent/carers rationale is that school cannot meet need

Mental Health Support

• Reduced need for medical needs service due to mental health and wellbeing reasons
• Reduction in mental health waiting lists through demand being met earlier
• Reduction in need for acute services

EHCP process, quality and decision-making

• Improved timeliness of EHCP processes
• Increased quality (proportions of silver & gold increasing)
• Improved feedback

Early identification and support

• Reduced Semh identification as primary need, closer to national averages, through more appropriate identification
• Increased access to specialist professionals

Inclusivity and infrastructure

Reduction in Neet rates for post-16 Yp

Increased setting confidence and capability to meet need (e.g. moderated Ipsef and new OFSTED inspection outcomes for inclusion)

Increased 2-year-old Ey Families in Receipt of Additional Support uptake

Increased Cyp, Parent/Carer (via feedback) that need can be met in mainstream settings

Increased professional confidence (via feedback) that need can be met in mainstream settings

Provision that supports all needs

Increased proportion of Cyp on mainstream school rolls (including Specialist Resource Bases)

Appropriate specialist provision (including SRBs) available in a timely way to Cyp with the most complex needs

Reduction in independent specialist placements

Improvement in attainment across the system (% Good Level of Development, % KS2 Reading, Writing, Maths, % English & Maths GCSE)

Local metrics to be reviewed and confirmed by Local Inclusion Partnership

Once principles agreed, further work will be required to refine and identify clear definitions for each measure. In some cases, new data will need to be collected.

We will agree local financial metrics that complement our non-financial metrics

• Achieving our success measures should lead to delivering better value for money and stabilisation of finances in the medium to longer term through the rebalancing of spend towards the mainstream sector and reduced reliance on independent sector placements, when combined with Government reforms. • Schools Forum and the Partnership will agree a set of local financial metrics that would indicate progress towards this goal. • These metrics must be considered in conjunction with the non-financial metrics to understand the whole picture for Norfolk, which financial metrics alone will not tell us.

Possible metrics for consideration could include: • Average cost of different placement types, e.g. special school, specialist resource base (inclusion base), enhanced specialist provisions (support bases), independent, and transitional education services (for those not on a school roll) • Total ‘run rate’ of key placement types, where ‘run rate’ is the full year effect of all current placements at a snapshot in time • Average home to school transport cost per day for different types of provision

• Local metrics to be reviewed and confirmed by our Schools Forum and Local Inclusion Partnership • Once principles are agreed, further work will be required to refine and identify clear definitions for each measure. In some cases, new data will need to be collected.

Appendix C

Official Sensitive: Not government policy

How To Use This Tool

Purpose of the tool This tool is intended for use by local SEND & AP partnerships (which should include local authorities, integrated care boards, education providers and representatives of families and children and young people) to identify their relative maturity in terms of collaboration and partnership working, providing a shared understanding of opportunities to strengthen the culture and practice of partnership in context. It has been co-developed with input from stakeholders and refined through testing as part of the SEND & AP Change Programme. It is purely a developmental tool and to be most useful it is important to complete it as honestly and transparently as possible - the results are not used for accountability or oversight but may be used to inform support.

How to complete it The 'Assessment' tab below contains summaries of the maturity descriptors for each dimension which can be selected via a drop-down. There is a fuller framework with more detailed descriptors available in the document 'Partnership Maturity Assessment Guidance' that accompanies this tool. Local areas can use this additional guidance where needed, for instance to help guide your assessment in an area where partners cannot reach consensus, or to provide more input into plans for improvement. In addition to the rating, we encourage areas to summarise into this tab the identified strengths/successes or work in progress, along with issues/gaps that they want to address and (where possible) any agreed focus areas for improvement.

Local partnerships can approach completing the tool in whatever way works best in their context. There are a number of principles that support the most effective use of the tool:

• Input from a wide range of partners, ensuring that the overall assessment is an 'on balance' judgement that reflects the collective views of the partnership
• Maximise space for dialogue about where the partnership is currently, as well as reflecting on how you got here and where you would like to go next;
• Consider what you need to focus on as a result of the assessment and what it would take to further mature your partnership working and collaboration
• Encourage constructive challenge between partners, ensuring there is a robust assessment of factors such as culture, behaviour, and leadership not just

formal arrangements.

Assessment ratings should be based in evidence and examples but it is not necessary to exhaustively capture these in the assessment tool. Illustrative examples should be used to help demonstrate why the relevant rating was arrived at and where practice is varied, the boxes on strengths and gaps can be used to highlight any areas that are positive or negative outliers relative to the overall rating.

The partnership can use the tool’s results to reflect, plan, act, and evolve collaboratively - ensuring that local improvement activity is strategic and evidence-led, enabling wider changes to provision for SEND and AP focused on meaningful outcomes for children, young people and families.

How to use the results and the role of DfE

In addition, sharing your results with the Department for Education, including identified gaps/issues and related improvement activities, also helps to build a national picture of the support required for local partnerships to be consistently strengthened.

Description of the ratings

The tool uses four levels of maturity for the assessment of partnership arrangements - an overview of what is meant by each of these levels is included below as a guide but local areas should consult the more comprehensive guidance if required.

Assessment

There are currently no significant arrangements or plans in place for this area. Collaboration or partnership working has not yet been considered or initiated. There may be little to no awareness of the need for development, and no structured discussions or intentions are evident at this stage.

0 - Not Yet Emerging If you are 'emerging' it is likely that only basic arrangements are in place and any plans to improve or extend these arrangements are at an early stage or have not yet been fully formulated. There may be a range of positive relationships and partner intentions but these have not yet resulted in sustained collaboration and partnership working.

1 – Emerging If you are 'developing', arrangements are established and being actively strengthened. Collaborative working is increasingly consistent across partners, with shared goals and clear responsibilities. There is growing evidence of joint initiatives and improved outcomes, as partnerships deepen and systems evolve. Continuous improvement is recognised and partners regularly reflect on progress and refine their approaches together.

2 – Developing If you are 'maturing', collaborative arrangements are well-established and fully integrated into everyday practice. Partnership working is sustained, effective, and widely recognised for driving improved outcomes. Continuous feedback and joint decision-making are routine, and a strong culture of trust and shared responsibility ensures that improvement is ongoing and adaptive to changing needs.

3 – Maturing

Appendix D

Norfolk's Partnership Maturity Assessment Sector Responses

A high-level view of the responses from different partners within Norfolk’s partnership across the individual pillars, showing where partners have similar views and where there are differences of experiences. This has helped us to understand the different experience and perceptions of partners, which has informed, and will continue to inform, the work of our Local Inclusion Partnership and the development of our SEND reform plan.

LA Education Sector Family Voice Norfolk

Pillar 1 Pillar 2 Pillar 3 Pillar 4 Pillar 5 Pillar 6 Pillar 7

Icb EoE Chc Parent Carer Survey

9 LA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Pillar 1

Pillar 2

Pillar 7

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Pillar 3

Pillar 6

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

Pillar 4 Pillar 5

Icb

Pillar 1

Pillar 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 2

Pillar 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 3

Pillar 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 4

Pillar 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 5

Pillar 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 6

Pillar 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA

Icb

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Pillar 7

Pillar 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LA

Parent Carer Survey EoE Chc

Education Sector

Parent Carer Survey

Icb Family Voice Norfolk Education Sector

Family Voice Norfolk

EoE Chc

LA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Icb

Appendix E – Summary of engagement

Co-producing our SEND reform plan

• Since the SEND reform plan 'commission' was launched, we have run a joint NHS and Local Authority working group to oversee stakeholder engagement, analyse need and develop proposals for operationalising the national reforms. This group has fed into a senior steering group with DfE and NHS England leadership to ensure the work is on track and all partners are engaged.

• We have run engagement sessions across the partnership, which have provided a wealth of feedback and input that has shaped our plan. All areas of the partnership were invited to engage.

• We have held virtual and in-person sessions with parents and carers of children with SEND as well as using online/social media forums to gather views and perspectives from those with lived experience.

• We have also extensively engaged with partners including early years, schools, MATs, post-16/further education sector, Icb, health providers, Parent Carer Forum, Sendiass, and wider local services.

• The focus of this engagement has been to undertake a Swot analysis for Norfolk against the reforms, to support improved, shared understanding of Norfolk’s current position and gather input to inform our initial Reform Plan.

• We have undertaken workshops with particular focus on Experts at Hand, Inclusion Bases, our Universal offer and co-production and partnership working.

• We have also reviewed our SEND Joint Strategic Needs Assessment undertaken in 2025, which included the outcome of our SEND Survey and the voice of both children and young people as well as their parents and carers.

• Insight collected has been played back at each workshop to ensure feedback previously captured is built upon and providing an opportunity to reflect and share a holistic view of all stakeholder input.

• The next slide summarises the engagement activities undertaken to inform the development of our plan.

Summary of formal engagement sessions

Appendix F – Norfolk’s Proposed Experts at Hand Offer

Proposed Experts at Hand Offer on a Page

Our Proposed Expert at Hand model

Increase the breadth of expertise accessible across all ages and stages We will: • Introduce additional experts and ensure existing experts can maximise their impact • Expand the SEND and Inclusion Support Model approach to early year and post-16 and strengthen the impact of the school age element of the model

Increase the breadth of expertise accessible across all ages and stages continued

Increase the breadth of expertise accessible across all ages and stages continued

Increasing capability and capacity in mainstream schools/settings to meet higher levels of needs consistently

We will: • Expand our offer of outreach from special teachers and leaders • Introduce Early Years Area SENDCos • Expand and further embed our STEPs model

Mitigating risk of exclusion, supporting re-engagement and preventing Neet at post 16

We will: Invest in our outreach offer to ensure that settings have access to the necessary knowledge and skills, such as youth work approaches and careers guidance capacity, to support and reintegrate Yp into full time education and to prevent Neet

Use of consistent assessment framework and tools to support professionals and parents to support development across ages and stages

We will: • Invest in training and tools to support a Norfolk Relational Practice Framework, aligned with Norfolk’s existing frameworks (i.e. PEaSS, Indes, Ipsef) • Support settings to further develop co-production approaches

Transformation and administration

We will: Ensure supporting capacity is in place to ensure the system feels the benefit of the wider investment

Appendix G – High-Level Delivery Plan

Building Blocks

Building Block 2: Enhancing targeted and targeted plus inclusion support Building Block 1: Strengthening universal inclusion core offer across

mainstream settings

• Neurodiversity Assessment / Diagnosis Model
• Enhanced Steps offer
• Deploy School Led AP Model Tier 1 (Outreach)
• Design and deliver additional expert capacity
• Youth Work and Enhanced Iag/careers guidance
• Reintegration into full time education pathway
• Targeted response to children severely absent from school
• MHSTs
• Expansion of Soas (Specialist Outreach Advisory Service)
• Enhanced SEND Provisions/Inclusion Support Bases
• PEaSS (Universal Inclusion Expectations), Indes & Ipsef frameworks including Norfolk Transitions Framework
• Norfolk Relational Practice Framework
• Early needs identification tool
• Neurodiversity universal training
• Bitesize learning through communications

Building Block 4: Enhancing coproduction and partnerships

Building Block 3: Access to specialist provision

• Voice of the child and co-production - support to settings
• Expansion of SEND and Inclusion Support Model
• Improving SEND Pathways, Processes and Decision Making
• Scope and deliver a programme of enabling Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure in partnership with local schools / colleges / MATs
• Deliver full programme of Specialist Resource Bases (Inclusion Bases) comprising Tier 2 time-limited Alternative Provision places.
• Ongoing review of Norfolk’s estate reflecting future Inclusion Base definitions – support bases and specialist bases.
• Deliver reconfigured Tier 3 Alternative Provision landscape, including development of additional Tier 3 AP satellite.
• Deliver the Ryston special school at Downham Market and the Unity Great Yarmouth special school.

Strengthening universal inclusion

core offer across mainstream

settings

PEaSS, Indes & Ipsef frameworks Bitesize learning Norfolk Relational Early needs identification Neurodiversity including Universal through Practice Framework tool Norfolk Transitions Framework Training comms

Enhancing targeted and targeted

plus inclusion support

Targeted response to

Expansion of Neurodiversity School Led Specialist Additional children severely absent from assessment/ AP Model Outreach expert capacity diagnosis Tier 1 (Outreach) Advisory model Service school (Soas) Enhanced Capacity to SEND Provisions/ Reintegration Mental Health support reintegration into full-time Enhanced Steps offer Support education Inclusion Teams into full-time education and pathway Support Bases reduce Neet

Access to specialist provision

Specialist support Early support

Future Reform Readiness

Scope and deliver Deliver Full Programme of a programme of Deliver two new Deliver reconfigured Tier Ongoing review of Norfolk’s estate enabling Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure in partnership with special schools: Specialist Resource Bases (Inclusion Bases) Unity School Great Yarmouth The Ryston School 3 AP landscape, including development of additional Tier 3 reflecting future Inclusion Base definitions – support base and including Tier 2 at Downham time-limited AP local schools / colleges / MATs Market AP satellite specialist base placements

Enhancing coproduction and

partnerships

Expansion of SEND Improving SEND pathways, Processes and Decision Making Voice of the child and co-production - and Inclusion Support model support to settings

Block 4: Enhancing coproduction and partnerships

Theme Draft milestones

Q2 2026-27 Jul-Aug-Sep Q3 2026-27 Oct-Nov-Dec 2027-28 2028-29 Q4 2026-27 Jan-Feb-Mar Financial year

2028-29

Support to settings to further Monitor implementation of co-production benchmark develop capturing the voice of the child and co- Agree resource to deliver offer Offer rolled out production Monitor, evaluate and amend offer Ongoing roll out, monitoring, evaluating and amending Develop operating model to incorporate additional experts and ensure Recruitment of Zone Managers offer where necessary maximum impact, implement, test and review Expansion of SEND and Inclusion Support Model Design and implementation planning for post-16 model with post-16 Post-16 model live sector Ey model live Design and implementation planning for Ey model with Ey sector EHCP Impact survey Training delivery Improving SEND Pathways, Review findings Communications Processes and Decision strategy Detailed planning to design further Making activities

Enablers

Theme Draft milestones

2028-29 Q2 2026-27 Jul-Aug-Sep Q3 2026-27 Oct-Nov-Dec 2027-28 2028-29 Q4 2026-27 Jan-Feb-Mar Financial year

Recruit additional comms capacity Continue and expand delivery of existing comms plan to have greater impact Continue continuous improvement of zone data packs and effective usage Enabling activities Further development of local inclusion indicators Recruit additional enabling capacity e.g. transformation resource, commissioning, system mapping resource, I&A capacity and L&D capacity

N.B. all enabling activities are funded or part funded by Experts at Hand funding

Appendix H – Strategic Capital and Specialist Provision Plan

Investment Journey so far

Commitment to inclusion – pioneering Inclusion Bases (Specialist Resource Bases)

2019 2026 Future

88 Specialist Resource (Inclusion) Bases 3 AP Academies 18 Special Schools

37 Specialist Resource Bases (Su/RPs) 3 AP Academies 16 Special Schools

21 Specialist Resource Bases (Su/RPs) 3 AP Academies 13 Special Schools

• Norfolk has a longstanding commitment to enabling inclusion in mainstream schools through its Specialist Resource Base (Srb) programme, dating back roughly two decades. This reflects a consistent local ambition to educate children as close to home as possible, within mainstream settings where appropriate. Norfolk’s programme was identified as an effective model and helped to inform DfE’s own conceptualisation of Inclusion Bases.

• Prior to the 2014 SEND Reforms, Norfolk planned a major expansion of specialist unit and resource provision (SURPs) through the Building Schools for the Future (Bsf) programme. This expansion was cancelled following the national decision to end Bsf funding in 2010, requiring a fundamental reassessment of both existing and planned Srb provision.

• National policy direction shifted to DfE determined academy and free school initiatives, as part of which two new schools were allocated to Norfolk: Wherry School (special school for children with Autism without a corresponding learning disability), and Pinetree School (an AP Free School).

• National endorsement of the free school model for specialist provision shaped local expectations, reinforcing perceptions that specialist free schools were the preferred route to meeting need, rather than locally commissioned provision across different school types.

Commitment to inclusion – pioneering Inclusion Bases (Specialist Resource Bases)

• Prior to 2018, there was no dedicated high needs capital allocation for local authorities. However, the 2014 SEND Reforms led to a rapid increase in demand for specialist provision. As local capacity failed to keep pace, tribunal appeals rose, with judgments frequently determining mainstream placements as unsuitable.

• In the absence of a national SEND capital funding mechanism comparable to Basic Need, Norfolk concluded that local action was necessary. In 2017, work began on a full SEND and Alternative Provision Sufficiency Strategy.

• The first national high needs capital allocations were announced in 2018. Norfolk’s funding allocation was not sufficient to address accumulated demand, expand special school capacity, or support the scale of investment needed to strengthen inclusive provision in mainstream schools.

• The first SEND and AP Sufficiency Strategy, completed in early 2018, set out the full scale of need and the investment required to respond sustainably. On this basis, Norfolk County Council approved an unprecedented £120m of local capital investment into SEND provision.

• A SEND and AP Capital Transformation Programme was established, with active scheme planning commencing in 2018–19. Investment was deliberately structured to support a balanced system: expanding SRBs in mainstream schools to strengthen local inclusion, alongside new and expanded special school provision across the range of needs where demand was greatest. Since then, the strategy has been refreshed twice further – in 2021 and 2024.

• From 2021 onwards, further national high needs capital funding has been announced, totalling £63m for Norfolk between 2021 and 2027 . Combined with the two special free schools recently awarded alongside that delivered by DfE previously, Norfolk’s scale of local investment will match that allocated to date by the DfE.

Existing infrastructure & Investment to date

Sufficiency Strategy – needs analysis and iterative, evolving planning

• Norfolk’s SEND & AP capital plan forms part of the overall Local First Inclusion Transformation Programme, the impetus of which is to improve and increase mainstream inclusion and reduce reliance on EHCPs and correspondingly special school placements.

• The sufficiency strategy and resulting capital plan is predicated on a sophisticated local needs analysis comprising:

• Demand profiling: rates of EHCPs; parent and school requests for specialist provision; SEND Tribunal appeal rates and outcomes; net migration of high needs pupils into Norfolk; geographical spread and transport impact; age ranges; SEND profiles including relative complexity based on individual needs descriptor in education settings (Indes) empirical benchmarking.

• National and statistical benchmarking: EHCP populations across different provision types and categories of SEND; educational attainment of children.

• Capacity in the overall estate: by type of provision and SEND category, including ratios of Su/Rp provision between primary (infant and junior) and secondary to facilitate supply for transition points.

• Shortfalls between rates of demand and available supply.

• Our profiling of our SEND population where special school places are under request supports the continued strategy to develop a graduated approach to sufficiency planning.

• This profiling is based on pupil Indes which benchmarks children’s SEND against an objective set of descriptors across seven SEND domains: speech language and communication; learning and cognition; social communication and interaction; social, emotional and mental health; hearing impairment; visual impairment and physical disabilities.

Sufficiency Strategy – needs analysis and iterative, evolving planning

• The Indes scale these domains against complexity from 1-7, with 7 representing the highest complexity of need.

• When overlaid against our population where special school places are requested it confirms that

➢approximately 30% have Indes profiles at a rate of at least 6 and above across four individual domains;

➢a further 25% have Indes profiles at a rate of 6 and above across three individual domains;

➢40% have Indes at a rate of at least 6 across two domains and

➢the remaining 5% rate at 6 in one domain.

• This distribution is weighted more heavily in the primary age range.

• Whilst co-morbidity of high need across multiple Indes domains does not definitively indicate mainstream provision would be unsuitable, it provides evidence that there remains a population whose needs are likely to exceed mainstream provision even with the enhancements of an Inclusion Base and further investment into both mainstream bases and special schools is required within Norfolk.

• This position is explicated within our overall sufficiency plan, building on its current eight-year delivery journey and reflects evolving population needs and demographics. Our strategy has been responsive to new and emerging demand, and we have been innovative in developing inclusive mainstream solutions through which to respond, for example, the creation of a brand new “family” of Su/Rp in the form of our Specialist Hubs of Inclusive Practice (SHIPs) responding to increasing number of high needs profiles of children with significant global developmental delay in Reception/KS1.

• The following maps show our investment to date and relationship to our “balanced system” of specialist provision.

Time-limited SRBs for Learning difficulties – Mld: (KS1-2)

• Seventy time-limited, intensive support for pupils who are have learning difficulties and are unable to access an adapted mainstream curriculum.

• Pupils have low levels of academic achievement due to a generalised learning difficulties, especially basic literacy and numeracy.

• Will have a profile more akin to a moderate learning difficulty profile than complex, co-morbid difficulties presented by children accessing SHIPs

• Dual registration between home mainstream school and host mainstream school.

• Ability to make accelerated progress with the intensive support of the Srb and rejoin mainstream provision within a three-term period.

Specialist Hubs of Inclusive Practice (SHIPs) - Long term SRBs for global developmental delay: (KS1-2)

• Long term or permanent primary bases for children with global developmental delay.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

• Children typically have co-morbid gross and fine motor difficulties, are pre- or non-verbal requiring augmentative communication systems, have limited self care including toileting and reduced social learning and play skills.

Six opened 2025-26 - mix of local investment and high needs capital allocations.

• They require highly individualised curriculums and intensive support.

• Outcomes will vary: some pupils will catch up and progress with early support whereas others need ongoing specialist support due to pervasive learning disabilities.

Strong partnerships of LA & schools/Trusts.

On phased growth expected to be reached in 2-3 terms.

Time-limited SRBs for Speech and Language: (KS1)

• Sixty time-limited places for pupils who experience severe, persisting speech disorder which makes speech unintelligible to listeners.

• Have a severe expressive language disorder which has significant functional impact on communication.

• Verbal comprehension unimpaired.

• Dual registration between home mainstream school and host mainstream school.

• Following an intensive language rich curriculum and speech and language therapy programme will have ability to access mainstream curriculum and rejoin home school.

Necton opening imminently addressing geographical gap mid west Norfolk.

Long term SRBs for Autism / Communication & Interaction: (KS1-KS4)

• Long term places for pupils who face barriers to education such as social communication, sensory sensitivities, anxiety and busy environments.

Four new bases opened 2021-2026.

• Experience challenges with social understanding, flexibility, processing information, regulating emotions, rigid thinking and behavioural responses.

Local investment & DfE high needs capital

• May struggle with peer relationships, shifting attention and recognising safety risks but have cognitive potential to achieve at age related expectations when barriers are reduced.

Sufficiency responses to high incidence needs, plugging geographical and age/stage gaps.

Time-limited SRBs for Social and Emotional: (KS1-KS4)

• Time-limited placements, providing intensive intervention for pupils finding it difficult to manage the expectations of mainstream.

• Dual registration between home mainstream school and host mainstream school.

• Pupils may have experienced adverse childhood experiences and limited access to attuned, nurturing relationships. Some distrust adults or avoid support due to shame.

• Pupils find environments and interactions overwhelming and struggle to regulate emotional and behavioural responses.

• Low attainment linked to executive functioning difficulties, reduced engagement, low motivation, limited resilience, social interaction needs, or motor skills difficulties.

• Following an intensive programme of intervention over 3-4 terms, pupils have developed improved self-regulation and emotional management skills to return to mainstream school.

• Semh SRBs represent Tier 2 of Norfolk Alternative Provision Strategy.

Six new bases opened since 2021.

Mix of local investment and High Needs Capital allocation.

Primary provisions developed to address geographical gaps.

Secondary provision in active development as part of the Srb and Alternative Provision three-tiered strategy and facilitation of feeder/transition between primary and secondary.

Long term / permanent Srb for Deaf children: (KS1-2)

• Twelve long term placements for children with a moderate / severe / profound hearing loss which is their primary need.

• Will also present with:

➢ Significant delay in language development

➢ Utilise Deaf signing as principal means of communication and benefit from a Deaf signing peer group and Deaf culture

➢ Would not reach their potential in mainstream without the immersive support of a curriculum wholly adapted for the teaching of Deaf children.

➢ Require an environment with amplification systems.

➢ Teaching supported by qualified teachers of the Deaf and Speech and Language therapy.

• Children generally return to full mainstream education at KS3 to prepare them for adult life with continued support from the Virtual School for Sensory Support.

For example, in Year 3 children:

• Develop an understanding of British Sign Language (Bsl) grammar and different hand shapes.

• Learn a wide range of vocabulary in Bsl .

• Engage in chat in Bsl, with each other and members of the Deaf community who join throughout the year.

• Learn how to translate from English to Bsl and vice versa.

Norfolk SEND & AP existing infrastructure – Enhanced Specialist Provisions (ESPs)

• ESPs are school-run provisions, led or overseen by a teacher, SENDCo, or senior leader, delivering an adapted curriculum so pupils can flourish.

• They support children with high needs to remain in mainstream as part of the graduated response.

• ESPs are for pupils already on the school roll, unlike SRBs which have a wider, community intake, dual registration for sessional SRBs and council arranged transport.

• They are flexible, not subject to formal school organisation requirements, significant change or place change regulations.

• Funding comes through Element 3 within the school’s graduated provision map, rather than place-plus-top-up.

• Norfolk currently has 111 ESPs, providing places for 1,153 pupils.

• As with SRBs, an EHCP is not needed to access an Esp.

• ESPs operate across primary and secondary but with most in primary.

• Three core types of Esp: global development delay with significant needs, moderate learning disability, nurture provisions.

• Norfolk combines and coheres its infrastructural support for ESPs and SRBs facilitating operational and strategic networks between host schools and the local authority.

• Our future strategy will consider ESPs and their relationship to SRBs in any future definition of Inclusion Bases and the relative structural arrangements between support and specialist bases (i.e. funding arrangements and school organisation) and profile of need and complexity alongside how they will deliver national Special Provision Packages.

Existing infrastructure & investment to date – Special Schools

Special Schools for Learning disabilities and co-morbid

needs (EYs to KS5)

Area of Development profile: • Severe or profound cognitive impairment (not delay), typically below 1st centile.

• Attainment scores under 60, with cognition at least four years below age-related expectations by Year 6.

• Require substantial levels of support to make academic progress and present with co-morbid speech and language, physical, sensory, autism and Semh needs.

• Needs are pervasive and progress will be limited and slow.

• Attainment at Post 16 will be pre-qualification or lowest level. GSCEs inaccessible.

• High rate of eligibility for Adult Care and Support at post 18 under learning disability pathways.

• The Bridge Easton opened January 2023 in response to the 2018 Sufficiency Strategy. • Central DfE Special Free School Wave 2 • Complemented by expanding existing Ld special schools where feasible (Ncc Investment). • Addressing capacity pressures in Greater Norwich and A47 Western corridor • Reached (and exceeded) full occupancy Summer 2026

Existing infrastructure and investment to date – Special Schools

Special schools for Autism / Communication & Interaction: KS1-5

• Severe social, communication and sensory needs causing significant distress and debilitation in mainstream settings requiring whole school specialist facilities, infrastructure, therapies, environmental adaptations. • Broadly average cognition with no learning disability; may present with learning difficulties, (i.e. executive function, expressive language). • Could attain at Entry to Level 3 at post 16. • May require support from Adult Social Care under Autism pathways.

Special schools for Social and Emotional needs: KS1-KS4

• Social and emotional needs rooted in trauma and attachment, rather than neurodevelopmental difference. • Despite sustained specialist support in a mainstream environment, including through specialist bases, demonstrate persistent, extreme emotional dysregulation and high-risk behaviours that cannot be safely managed without whole school approaches. • May require support from Adult Social Care under mental health pathways.

Bure Park opened Sept 2021 - Ncc Local Investment

Duke of Lancaster opened January 2022 - Ncc Local Investment

Reached (and exceeded) full occupancy Autumn 2025

Reached (and exceeded) full occupancy Autumn 2025

Addressed geographical gap of Asd provision created by DfE opening Wherry School

Addressed geographical gap of Semh provision in East

Existing infrastructure – Alternative Provision

Alternative Provision: Uet Pathfinder School and Satellites:

• KS1-4 placements for pupils permanently excluded or missing education.

• Range of SEND and non-SEND.

• Significant barriers to mainstream education relating to high-level behaviour presentation, having exceeded thresholds for Fair Access protocols to reintegrate to mainstream school.

• Pupils have experienced disrupted education resulting in significant gaps in learning.

• Works with the local authority to support mainstream reintegration where possible, or to support transition to an onward specialist Semh setting or post- 16 education or training.

Alternative Provision: Uet Compass and Satellites and Pinetree

• Specialist alternative provision with intake broadly similar to those of Semh special schools.

Journey time 1.5 hours, 70 miles

• Broadly average cognition with no pervasive learning disability; may show a spiky learning profile (i.e. executive function, expressive language difficulties).

• Social and emotional needs rooted in trauma and attachment, rather than neurodevelopmental difference.

• Despite sustained specialist support in a mainstream environment, including through specialist bases, demonstrate persistent, extreme emotional dysregulation and high-risk behaviours that cannot be safely managed without whole school approaches.

Norfolk SEND & AP existing infrastructure – Independent Special Schools

Norfolk has a proactive and diverse independent special school sector and ranks fourth among its statistical neighbours for both placement rates (as a proportion of the school-age population) and volume of independent settings and places.

These schools largely serve pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs or autism/communication profiles - areas where Norfolk has prioritised sufficiency through Specialist Resource Bases.

While causality is complex, local market presence of such setting influences placement patterns and can impact inclusion strategies.

Norfolk welcomes future national policy and regulatory support in managing independent special school availability to ensure local systems can prioritise inclusive, mainstream- based provision.

Without this, falling rolls and surplus estate risk further independent special school market growth that runs counter to our core Inclusion Base model of sufficiency.

Future Investment and Strategy

Building on our existing strong mainstream provision • As the previous section demonstrates, Norfolk has a long-established mainstream inclusion model which predates the ambitions set out in the SEND reforms. Our focus now is to build on this mature foundation, with continued investment in mainstream-based provision as the cornerstone of our capital strategy.

• At completion of our current programme, 51 of 354 primary schools will host an Srb, with a further 89 delivering Esp provision. This reflects 40% of primary schools, delivering strong system coverage against the practical constraints of Norfolk’s sparsity and rurality. At secondary phase, over half of Norfolk’s 53 secondary schools will host an Srb, with a further 20 delivering Esp provision. 42 provisions will be hosted by seventeen discrete multi-academy trusts with eighteen LA maintained.

• This has been achieved through a strong track record of co-production with schools and multi-academy trusts. A significant number of settings are already, or have committed to, hosting provision on behalf of their communities, reflecting both confidence in the model and the strength of system relationships.

• We take a rigorous approach to approving host schools, considering not only site capacity but leadership, governance, ethos and quality. Decisions are informed by a blend of qualitative and quantitative evidence, and for academies are further tested through the significant change process with the Regional Director. This approach will continue when developing new provisions.

• SRBs in Norfolk operate as part of a wider, coordinated inclusion system. Schools benefit from structured support from specialist teachers, educational psychologists and therapy services, alongside strong school-to-school collaboration facilitated by the local authority. Crucially, Norfolk’s SRBs are truly specialist, configured and resourced for specific needs, rather than generic in design.

• Norfolk is proud to deliver Cullum Centres hosting up to four provisions within its Asd Srb family securing significant external private investment through the Cullum Family Trust and its delivery partner, the National Autistic Society, reflecting their confidence in the strength and maturity of Norfolk’s model.

• Through delivery of our programme, we have also refined our capital approach. Earlier phases required new build in some areas; however, we are now responding to falling rolls and increased system maturity by prioritising refurbishment and repurposing where appropriate. This enables faster delivery, better value for money, and alignment with the longer-term viability of schools.

• Taken together, this demonstrates a well-established, scalable and evidence-led model of mainstream inclusion, with SRBs at its core, strong system partnership, and a clear trajectory for continued improvement.

Specialist Hubs of Inclusive Practice (SHIPs) - Long term SRBs for global developmental delay: (KS1-2)

Planned investment takes Norfolk

from six bases, with 96 places to

13 bases with 208 places. Net increase 112 places.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

Long term SRBs for Autism / Communication & Interaction: (KS1-KS4)

Planned investment takes Norfolk

from 15 bases, with 268 places to

23 bases with 418 places. Net increase 150 places.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

Sessional SRBs for Social and Emotional: (Primary)

Planned investment takes Norfolk from 9 bases, with 126 places to 14

bases with 190 places. Net increase 64 places.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

Planned investment takes Norfolk

from 1 base, with 32 places to 16

Sessional SRBs for Social and Emotional: (Secondary)

bases with 308 places. Net increase 276 places.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

Social & Emotional SRBs within Norfolk’s Alternative Provision Three Tier Strategy

• The SEND and AP Reforms maintains the graduated three-tiered AP system, with all parts of the model delivered by AP Academies / Pupil Referral Units.

• Norfolk operates a three-tier AP model that is intentionally designed to keep pupils connected to mainstream school wherever safe and appropriate.

• Within Norfolk, Tier 2 provision is developed within mainstream school sites through our Social and Emotional SRBs, providing time-limited, intensive support with clear reintegration pathways and expectations from the outset. • Norfolk’s rationale is that Tier 2 is most effective when it is physically and operationally linked to mainstream environments: it supports early stabilisation, enables shared practice and workforce development, and normalises reintegration as the expected outcome rather than an aspiration.

• Semh bases therefore go further than the national model by functioning as an inclusion mechanism within both Norfolk’s SEND and AP local system, strengthening prevention and reducing escalation to AP Academies at Tier 3.

• Placing Tier 2 in school hosted bases also creates a local culture that mainstream schools are part of the AP system rather than referrers to or beneficiaries of. Decision making for access to Tier 2 placements is delegated to local partnerships of school leaders further strengthening shared expectations, collective responsibility and mutual support and challenge. Norfolk’s aim is to create positive pathways for pupils to move between support from AP rather than a result of a negative or punitive experience such as a permanent exclusion.

Planned investment – Special Schools: Learning Disability

• DfE will be aware that Norfolk has continued with delivery of two new special schools rather than taking a capital receipt.

• This does not represent a shift away from inclusion; significant expansion of specialist bases remains central to the strategy as this plan articulates.

• The Great Yarmouth school responds to need that cannot be met through inclusion bases alone.

• Tribunal rulings confirm that a cohort of children require special school placement, with mainstream or base provision assessed as unsuitable.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

• It has also ruled that John Grant School is already over capacity and therefore Norfolk continues to have cohorts of children in the east requiring additional places that cannot otherwise be secured.

• Great Yarmouth has only one Ld special school serving a large and significantly deprived population.

The new school therefore addresses:

➢insufficient capacity for pupils with complex needs;

• As the map demonstrates, there is no accessible alternative specialist provision locally, leading to placements at distance or in high-cost independent settings.

➢demand that cannot be met through inclusion bases alone;

➢a defined geographical cold spot in the east of the county.

Without additional local specialist capacity, the local authority cannot meet its statutory duties within the current system.

Planned investment – Special Schools: Autism / Communication and Interaction

• Norfolk’s second school progressed rather than a capital receipt is the Ryston School.

• Norfolk has deliberately limited expansion of autism-specific special schools, with investment focused on inclusion bases, consistent with national direction.

• However, a cohort of children present with complex communication and interaction needs that cannot be met within base provision, requiring specialist placement.

• Such need for special school places rather than mainstream base places has again have been established through both local needs analysis and consistent rulings from the SEND Tribunal.

SHIPs are a brand-new concept of base in response to special school pressure.

• This has resulted in children travelling long distances to Fakenham and Norwich, often at high transport cost and with impact on outcomes.

As with our Great Yarmouth school, the Ryston School therefore also addresses:

• There is a clear geographical cold spot in the west, with no accessible specialist provision for this cohort.

➢insufficient local capacity for complex autism need; ➢demand that cannot be met through inclusion bases alone; ➢a defined geographical cold spot.

Planned investment – AP Academy Satellite

• Norfolk also has planned investment into registered Alternative Provision through an expansion of Uet Compass Academy.

• As set out earlier, our AP model prioritises creation of Tier 2 time-limited provision through our Social and Emotional SRBs.

• However, a cohort of primary aged children present with complex and persistent needs that cannot be met within time-limited provision and require longer term Tier 3 placements.

• These children have been permanently excluded or who have been assessed under the Fair Access protocol to have behavioural presentations which exceed what can be reasonably managed in mainstream school.

• There is currently insufficient Tier 3 capacity, especially for primary aged pupils in registered AP, resulting in high numbers of pupils receiving non- school AP to meet our duties under S19 Education.

• Uet Compass is a very small provision providing 65 places across four existing sites; it is likely that at least one of the satellites will be absorbed into this new larger satellite supporting wider sustainability and quality.

• Expansion of Uet Compass will be met by local funding, with the DfE High Needs Capital grant being reserved exclusively for increasing places in mainstream bases.

• These children ultimately require provision within a registered school.

• We have co-produced our Tier 3 strategy with Uet who are in full support.

Funding for Planned investment & use of the High Needs Capital Allocation (Hnca)

Our 26/27 DfE High Needs Capital allocation of £15,831,033 is exclusively targeted for expansion of Inclusion Bases, namely:

Total High Needs Capital Investment £15,831,033

Funding for Planned investment – other funding sources

Funding Commitment for wider planned schemes:

• The two new special schools, Unity Great Yarmouth and The Ryston School are funded by DfE through separate funding for special schools as part of the previous Safety Valve.

• The Alternative Provision Academy Satellite is funded through Ncc Capital borrowing – estimated cost £12.5m

• The Inclusion Bases in our capital plan listed here not being funded by DfE Hnca are funded from:

➢Ncc Capital borrowing

➢Private philanthropic capital investment

(Cullum Centres)

➢S106 Developer Contributions

➢Future DfE Hnca

• Total Ncc/other allocated investment: £44,399,967

Early Years and Post 16

• We recognise that the Reform Plan expects consideration of early years and post-16 within the capital strategy. While these are not currently reflected in Norfolk’s programme, this is a deliberate, evidence-led position.

• Norfolk has consistent relative low demand for early years and post-16 specialist provision, and there is no current system pressure indicating insufficient capacity.

• Capital investment has therefore been prioritised where need is demonstrably greatest, particularly within statutory school-age provision where pressures on the special school estate and High Needs Block are most acute.

• In early years, low demand combined with falling birth rates presents a less viable or sustainable case for capital expansion.

• At post-16, while a larger cohort of pupils with high needs is progressing through the system, our current assessment indicates that current pressures relate more to the range and distribution of curriculum and pathways than to a lack of specific building facilities.

• We are working with providers and DfE to consider these issues across our rurally dispersed geography and how best to strengthen more expansive curriculum offers, especially at pre-level 2 qualification and accreditation.

• We will continue to review this position as reforms progress, especially leading up to 2028-29 when legislative change is due and where children and young people will start to be reassessed to determine their support needs in relation to national inclusion standards and specialist provision packages.

• At this stage, the thresholds for capital investment in early years or post-16 provision are less compelling when compared the needs of pupils of compulsory school age; therefore, no specific case for capital expansion or development in these phases of education is set forward in our 26-27 plan.

• However, any future, compelling case for capital investment into either early years or post-16 will be considered in relation to future, available High Needs Capital allocations as part of our Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure approach set out next.

Improving the suitability of the mainstream estate

• More recently, Norfolk has piloted an Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure (Imi) programme to systematically improve the capacity of mainstream schools to meet a wider range of need through targeted environmental adaptations.

• The programme invites schools to bring forward match-funded proposals aligned to their accessibility strategies and pupil need, ensuring investment is locally owned, needs-led, and directly linked to improving inclusion in practice. Sparhawk Infant School is the first setting to benefit from this approach.

• While at an early stage, Imi is intended to become a core component of Norfolk’s capital strategy, drawing on both Basic Need and High Needs capital where appropriate. This will enable a scalable pipeline of inclusion-focused projects across the mainstream estate, with initial investment expected of c. £5m.

• Our initial emphasis will be to consider investment focused on schools hosting Enhanced Specialist Provision (Esp), where accommodation constraints currently limit the effectiveness of provision for some of the highest need pupils. This will be needs led.

• Targeting these settings will ensure that capital investment:

➢directly improves outcomes for children with the most complex needs

➢strengthens mainstream capacity to sustain inclusion

➢is clearly distinguished from general condition need, supported through existing funding routes

• Over the coming months, we will draw on intelligence from school evaluations using their Inclusive Provision Self-evaluation and future school Inclusion Strategies and planned use of the Inclusion Mainstream Fund. This will be complemented by further national clarity regarding specialist provision packages and Inclusion Bases alongside targeted communications and engagement with Norfolk schools to shape and strengthen the next phase of our Imi strategy.

• We will also consider the needs of the early years and post-16 sector when further developing our Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure strategy to ensure the offer spans the full 0-25 age range where evidence supports such.

Judging sufficiency of supply

• We assess sufficiency using consistent assumptions and review this annually as demand shifts. Based on the 2024/25 School SEND Census, our planned programme would provide capacity equivalent to

• 3.3% of the total school population

• around 15% of the total SEND population, and

• around 50% of the EHCP population.

• Critically, at the end of our existing planned programme we will have doubled mainstream base capacity, with Srb places available to just under 5% of the SEND population and around 15% of the EHCP population.

• We will continue to review inclusion base capacity as our local area inclusion plan develops, with anticipated future emphasis on secondary phase and transition pathways (including progression from SHIPs). As a result, we may add additional inclusion base capacity to our programme.

• We are also anticipating a necessity to review all types of specialist provision in light of the introduction of National Inclusion Standards and particularly Specialist Provision packages and future guidance drawing out definitions of support and specialist bases. This will be essential to ensure that our current portfolio of provision overlays accurately to the description of SEND provision that will be set out nationally.

• On this basis, we do not anticipate a requirement for further special school expansion beyond the two new schools already planned.

Reviewing Progress and Impact & Future Year Capital allocations

Maturity Matrix and Ensuring Impact

• Within our SEND Maturity Matrix, we have assessed Norfolk as “developing” against Pillar 7: the targeted, judicious and sustainable use of resources, including sufficiency, place planning and capital.

• We also consider that aspects of our approach are more mature, particularly our long-standing and strong delivery of bases in mainstream school which has informed national policy direction.

• However, Norfolk continues to have higher rates of EHCPs and special school placements compared to national and statistical neighbours, and we are clear that further progress is needed.

• Our capital strategy cannot deliver this shift in isolation. It sits alongside wider system and cultural change, which is central to our ambitions for Norfolk’s SEND system and set out across our SEND Reform Plan. There are also structural factors that continue to impact Norfolk locally, including the threshold for issuing EHCPs and the current balance within the system when considering placement preferences through the SEND Tribunal.

• Taken together with our Local First Inclusion strategy and the wider activity set out in this plan, we are confident that we are moving the system in the right direction and aligning with the ambitions of the national SEND reforms set out in Putting Children and Young People First.

• We will continue to respond to emerging national guidance as reforms develop, particularly in relation to Inclusion Bases, specialist provision frameworks and national inclusion standards which we consider to the more critical elements of pending national guidance in shaping the next phase of our sufficiency and place planning approach.

• Our wider strategy and the intended national legislative reform will ultimately need to combine to achieve the sustained improvement, full system change and cultural shift we jointly agree as essential in delivering the ambitions for England’s future SEND system.

Future Capital Allocations

• The Government have announced c. £3bn Hnca nationally through to 2029-30 (four years) with c. £860m (c. 29%) allocated in Year 1

• Norfolk received c. 1.84% of the 2026/27 allocation. On this basis, we may expect to receive c. £39m additional Hnca over the next 3 years, if the proportions remain similar.

• As already set out, Norfolk County Council have heavily invested in a capital programme, supported by borrowing, to deliver the equivalent of Inclusion Bases over a number of years, with future bases in the pipeline.

• At the time of that commitment, it had not been anticipated that the LA would also be required to commit significant revenue contributions, such as towards the cumulative deficit and significant revenue investment in SEND related services to transform Norfolk’s system. As well as these revenue costs, the Council has also had to support the financing of the cumulative deficit that has had a significant revenue impact, c. £10-12m treasury impact in 2025/26 alone.

• Given the ever increasingly challenging financial circumstances that local government find themselves in, this means that there is a risk to that Norfolk cannot continue to sustain the investment programme at the current pace without further Hnca.

• Therefore, to enable the LA to sustain revenue investment in transformation already committed, it is our intention that a proportion of this funding would be allocated to schemes already profiled to reduce the cost of capital borrowing. This is in line with the review of our whole capital programme for affordability in the context of the financial position of local government and, in particular, Lgr.

• In addition, future investment outside of the existing programme will be prioritised towards our Inclusive Mainstream Infrastructure strategy wherever possible, especially incorporating future definitions of Inclusion Bases (Support vs Specialist) across the early years, school and post-16 sectors.

Appendix I – Mediation and Sendiass

Mediation and Dispute Resolution Arrangements

Norfolk’s Mediation and Dispute Resolution (Mdr) Service is a commissioned independent and impartial service, ensuring all parties can engage with confidence. It is accessible to parents/carers and directly to children and young people, including referrals from Cyp themselves where appropriate. It supports disputes across Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), provision and placement and health and social care elements of support.

The contract and Performance Management Framework (Pmf) require the provider to demonstrate how the voices of Cyp and parents are embedded throughout service delivery. The provider (Anglia Care Trust (Act)) provide the following support to Cyp and parents/carers to help them prepare and express their views:

• Following an initial Mediation Information and Assessment Session (Mias) call, an information email is sent to families - this resource was developed in collaboration with Norfolk and Suffolk Sendiass, alongside both local authorities, to ensure the information provided is balanced, accurate and accessible. The email helps families understand the mediation process, outlines what information and evidence may be helpful to provide in advance, explains what they can expect depending on the nature of the disagreement, and signposts them to further sources of support, where appropriate. • Parents are encouraged to submit a written statement ahead of mediation, ensuring their views, concerns and desired outcomes are clearly captured and shared with all parties in advance of the meeting. • Recognising that not all children and young people wish to attend mediation, or feel comfortable participating directly, a ‘Child’s Voice’ document is shared with families following the Mias call. The document provides children and young people with an opportunity to share their views, feelings, wishes and aspirations in a format that works for them. Where completed, the Child’s Voice document is incorporated into the mediation briefing and shared with the local authority in advance of the mediation, ensuring the child’s perspective is considered throughout the process.

The role of Sendiass

• Norfolk Sendiass will continue to be used as a central, impartial, accessible source of high-quality, information, advice and guidance for families, children and young people and professionals.

• Norfolk Sendiass currently provides free, impartial and confidential support, delivered at arm’s length from SEND decision-making, enabling families to understand their rights, make informed choices and engage confidently with processes.

• Support is delivered through a range of inclusive and accessible routes which includes a helpline, casework, one-off support, online resources via a website and outreach. This enables Sendiass to provide equitable access and a consistent ‘front door’ offer, which includes tailored support where needs and situations are more complex. Information and guidance are rooted in legal frameworks and national standards, ensuring families receive clear, accurate advice about SEND rights, processes and options.

• The service responds to areas of development identified through Rag rating against the Sendiass Minimum Standards and through this process the team has strengthened quality assurance and continuous improvement mechanisms. The implementation of a service development plan, informed by self-assessment, and supported by governance oversight and ongoing review enable sustained improvement to be measured. Consistency is further reinforced through supervision, peer learning, and processes that support shared practice and reduce variation in delivery. In addition, anonymised insights and emerging themes from Sendiass are embedded into wider partnership improvement activity, enabling system leaders to identify pressures, close gaps between policy and lived experience, and strengthen accountability across the SEND system.

• Sendiass maintains clear structural and operational separation from decision-making functions, with distinct systems, branding and self-referral routes, ensuring parental confidence in their impartiality. The service provides clear, neutral and transparent information about mediation and dispute resolution, including roles, processes and boundaries, ensuring families are supported to make informed decisions without influence on outcomes. Ongoing visibility of impartiality is reinforced through open communication, specialist training and consistent messaging that advice is legally grounded.

Appendix J

The Local SEND Reform Plan

Data Template Guidance

Initial Data Return Tab guide

The template for initial data return alongside the Local SEND Reform Plan. Please use this tab to complete your initial data return and submit alongside your plan on 19 June 2026

Assumptions

The template for noting assumptions and data confidence. Please use this tab to set out any assumptions that underpin the submitted values, particularly assumptions that underpin forecast values.

Quarterly Returns

The template to be used for quarterly returns. Further details on the timing and mode of the first quarterly return will be communicated in due course.

Cell colour guide

User input cells

Editable cells - please input the required data in these cells

Calculation cells

Un-editable cells - these are automatic calculation output cells - please do not edit the cells

Data guide

0 Terminology for all categories

Note: 'inclusion bases' is an umbrella term that can refer to both 'specialist bases' (where places are funded and commissioned by LAs) or 'support bases' (where places are funded and commissioned by settings/multi-academy trusts). Under the former system, specialist bases were referred to as 'SEN units and resourced provision (Su/RPs)'.

Children and young people (Cyp):

Under 5 years of age Under school age Aged 5 to 10 Primary Aged 11 to 15 Secondary Aged 16 to 19 Further education (Fe) Aged 20 to 25 Further education (Fe)

Speech and Language Therapists (SaLTs) and support workers Includes qualified speech and language therapists and non-qualified assistants/workers that provide speech and language therapy support to children and young people with SEN.

Occupational Therapists (OTs) and support workers Includes qualified occupational therapists and non-qualified assistants/workers that provide occupational therapy support to children and young people with SEN. Educational Psychologists (EPs) and support workers Includes qualified educational psychologists and non-qualified assistants/workers that provide educational psychology support to children and young people with SEN.

1 Forecast expenditure for High Needs Block and against total Dsg Please input your High Needs Block financial data for both actual and forecast spend for specified categories. Please provide actual spend for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast spend for 2026 to 2027 financial year and 2027 to 2028 financial year. We expect your actual spend to reconcile to your s251 outturn return data. Other income should incorporate Icb and other contributions. Block transfers should include previously agreed block transfers for financial years 2024 to 2025, 2025 to 2026 and 2026 to 2027, and proposed block transfers in financial year 2027 to 2028. Please note that we have not announced arrangements beyond financial year 2026 to 2027. All expenditure should be input as a positive number and all income should be input as a negative number. The adjacent table will be calculated automatically to represent the year on year % change.

In 1.1, please input your actual and forecast outturn Dsg expenditure and any income. We expect your actual expenditure and income to reconcile to your s251 outturn return data. Expenditure should be input as a positive number and income should be input as a negative number.

Official# 2 Current and forecast unit cost of support for children and young people with SEN by setting type

Please provide actual and forecast average unit cost of support for children and young people with SEND for the specified settings. This includes children and young people with EHCPs, receiving individual top-ups or supported through the high needs block. Please provide actual spend for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast spend for 2026 to 2027 financial year and 2027 to 2028 financial year.

3 Forecast SEN transport expenditure

Please provide actual and forecast transport expenditure for both pre-16 and post-16 children and young people with SEND. Please provide actual expenditure for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast expenditure for 2026 to 2027 financial year and 2027 to 2028 financial year.

4 Current and projected number of all Cyp in local area categorised by age Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people in your local area by age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

5 Current and projected number of all Cyp with EHC plans or receiving top ups by age Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people in your local area with EHC plans (5.1), receiving individual top-ups (5.2), and supported through the high needs block without EHC plans or individual top-ups (5.3) by age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

6 Current and projected number of all Cyp with EHC plans by provision Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people with EHC plans in your local area by provision. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

7 Current and projected number of all Cyp with EHC plans by primary need Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people with EHC plans in your local area by primary need. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year. In 7.1 to 7.7, please provide the actual and projected number of children with EHC plan in the relevant settings by primary need.

8 Current and projected number of all Cyp with SEN in local area not in education Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people with SEN in your local area not in education by their age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

9 Current and projected number of all Cyp with SEN in Elective Home Education (Ehe) Please provide the actual and projected number of all children and young people with SEN in your local area in elective home education by their age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

10 Current and projected number of all Ehcna requests by Cyp age Please provide the actual and projected number of all received requests for educational, health and care needs assessment for children and young people in your local area by age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

11 Current and projected number of all EHC Needs Assessments by Cyp age Please provide the actual and projected number of all educational, health and care needs assessments completed for children and young people in your local area by age. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

12 Current and projected number of all EHCNAs that result in an EHCP Please provide the actual and projected number of all educational, health and care needs assessments that resulted in an EHCP in your local area by the age of the relevant child or young person. Please provide actual number for 2025 calendar year and the projected number for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

Official# 13 Current and projected number of available specialist places (capacity) per provision

Please set out the current and projected number of specialist places for each provision type in your area, based on the strategy set out in your plan. The projected number of places should reflect the number of places you expect to be able to made available by making use of high needs provision capital allocations and other capital sources (for example, delivery of special free schools, the alternative funding offer for special free schools where applicable, housing developer contributions) or if you expect places to increase with little to no cost. What is a 'specialist place'? A specialist place is defined as a placement for any pupil accessing provision from the Targeted, Targeted Plus, or Specialist layer of support. Specialist places are therefore for pupils who have Individual Support Plans or who are on a Specialist Provision Package - they may have been supported by an EHCP or SEN support in the previous system. How does this relate to Scap? For 'current capacity' you can use the figures submitted in Scap where appropriate, however Scap does not capture all provision types. Please do not use Scap forecasts in this return because Scap asks for forecasts assuming that capacity will not be a barrier to making future placements. This return is looking for the capacity you predict you will have available. Should I include specialist capacity in mainstream? Yes - please report on specialist capacity mainstream settings, but only where places have been created through specialist or support bases. We understand that there will also be specialist places in mainstream outside of bases, but we are not asking you to record those placements in this return. Where do I record places in sixth form colleges? Places in sixth form colleges attached to secondary schools should be captured within 'schools', not 'post-16 provision'. Do I need to record data at a specific point in the year? You can record data based on capacity at a snapshot in time, or an average over the academic or financial year. If you do choose to report at a snapshot, please ensure this is transparent and consistent for each year of your returns. How do I record capacity in specialist and support bases when the number of places is variable? Please reflect the maximum number of pupils who could access the base in a given day, including those with part-time placements. Example: on Monday, 6 pupils access the base for the whole day, 2 pupils access the base in the morning, and 2 pupils access the base in the afternoon; total capacity = 10 pupils.

14 Current and forecast capital spend by specialist provision Please set out the current and forecast capital spend by type of provision type in your area, over this period, based on the strategy set out in your plan. This should capture capital spend as it relates to place sufficiency and suitability, but is not limited to high needs provision capital allocations, rather it should capture all spend on specialist place sufficiency and suitability. It does not need to include funding for projects targeting condition of buildings or increasing mainstream provision, except where it may relate to improving the accessibility of places for pupils with SEND. Your data can draw on your high needs capital assurance return, but only needs to include spend from 2025 onwards. Please record the financial year you expect funding to be spent, rather than the year funding is allocated. Allocations for 2026-27 will be announced in the spring. Where possible, please include early plans for this funding in this table.

15 Current and planned workforce full time equivalent (Fte) Please provide the current and planned Fte of speech and language therapy, occupational therapy and educational psychology workforce for the local area. Please include planned workforce to be funded by the local inclusion partnership grant (Lipg). Workforce could include those employed by the local authority, employed by the Icb, or contracted agency workers. Please provide actual Fte for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast Fte for 2026 to 2027 financial year through to 2028 to 2029 financial year.

16 Total planned LA and Icb spend on professionals In 16.1 and 16.2 respectively, please provide actual and forecast LA and Icb expenditure on professionals by specialism. Please include planned spend from the local inclusion partnership grant (Lipg) and include spend on both full-time and fixed-term employees, as well as contracted agency workers. This should include total employee costs including national insurance contributions. Please provide actual expenditure for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast expenditure for 2026 to 2027 financial year and 2028 to 2029 financial year.

17 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Speech & Language Specialists and support workers Please provide the current and planned numbers of children and young people with SEND without EHC plans or specialist placement in the local area supported by speech and language therapy professionals. Please provide actual numbers for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast numbers for 2026 to 2027 financial year through to 2028 to 2029 financial year.

18 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Occupational Therapists and support workers Please provide the current and planned numbers of children and young people with SEND without EHC plans or specialist placement in the local area supported by occupational therapy professionals. Please provide actual numbers for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast numbers for 2026 to 2027 financial year through to 2028 to 2029 financial year.

19 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Educational Psychologists and support workers Please provide the current and planned numbers of children and young people with SEND without EHC plans or specialist placement in the local area supported by educational psychology professionals. Please provide actual numbers for 2024 to 2025 financial year through to 2025 to 2026 financial year and forecast numbers for 2026 to 2027 financial year through to 2028 to 2029 financial year.

20 Proportion of appeals to tribunals

Please provide the current and projected number of SEND appeals registered with the Tribunal against the local authority as a proportion of appealable decisions. Please provide actual rate for 2025 calendar year and the projected rate for 2026 calendar year through to 2029 calendar year.

The Local SEND Reform Plan

Assumptions and data confidence

Green

Strong confidence in quality and accuracy of data Reasonable confidence in quality and accuracy of data Some confidence in quality and accuracy of data Minimal confidence in quality and accuracy of data

Amber Green

Amber Red

Red

Data Confidence Rag Comment

Assumptions

Please set out any assumptions that underpin your submitted values, particularly assumptions that underpin forecast values, in the relevant sections below; and indicate your level of confidence in the quality and accuracy of your data.

Where some or minimal confidence in quality and accuracy of data is selected (Amber-Red or Red), please include details of specific data challenges in the comment column and include in your plan (Question 7) how your strategy to build capacity and capability in your data and analytics function will improve the quality and accuracy of your data.

1 Forecast expenditure for High Needs Block and against total Dsg Amber Green

The financial modelling reflects a realistic and evidence-based response to sustained demand pressures within the SEND system. Independent placements have been increased across 2026-27 and 2027-28 to align with current trajectory, given recent knowledge of activity in the sector to expand that the Council is unable to prevent & recognising that delivery of wider national SEND reforms will take time to moderate growth and stabilise the independent sector. Similarly, continued growth in maintained special school places has been assumed, reflecting ongoing tribunal activity to place additional children above stated capacity, which remains outside of the Council's control and continues to drive placement decisions. Post-16 provision has also been increased in line with the Council’s strategic focus on reducing Not in Education, Employment or Training (Neet) levels, which is expected to increase participation of young people with SEND in education and training. In contrast, a reduction in Section 19 provision has been modelled, reflecting the anticipated impact of reintegration, Experts at Hand (EaH) & Not in Education, Employment or Training (Neet) reduction strategies and strengthened inclusion pathways in mainstream and specialist settings. Additional expenditure in relation to capital investment is included, especially in relation to Specialist Bases and Alterative Provisions. Overall, these assumptions ensure the plan remains realistic in the short term while reforms are implemented to achieve longer-term system sustainability. A financial risk persists within Element 3 funding, there is an additional in year pressure linked to the summer term prior to an increased expected contribution from the Notional SEN from September that has been aligned to the academic year, as per requested approach from Schools Forum. Mitigation activity is underway, including strengthened financial oversight, challenge of placement decisions where appropriate and exploration of alternative provisions options to contact cost growth.

Forecasts reflect current demand and recent growth trends. Continued growth in volumes and complexity is reflected; no material reduction in demand is anticipated without national reform. Placement patterns are based on current mix, with changes only where expansion is already committed. Costs include a 3% annual inflationary uplift for pay and non‑pay pressures. No unconfirmed reform assumptions, additional funding or unagreed savings are included; Dedicated Schools Grant income reflects confirmed allocations and prudent projections of 3% inflationary increase for 2027-28. The cost of Out of County placements are shown as the net impact to Norfolk County Council. Revenue (High Needs Block) expenditure in relation to capital investments is included for current and future years. Impact of Experts at Hand is reflected in expenditure in 2027-28 in relation to Education Other Than at School (EOTAS). No expenditure for Post 16 Specialist Provision is identified in table as this is recorded financially within specialist placements, and so this will not correlate with any placement numbers identified in table 6.

2 Current and forecast unit cost of support by setting type Amber Green

Unit costs are based on the total cohort of Children and Young People (Cyp) supported through the High Needs Block. This includes Children and Young People (Cyp) with and without Education Health Care Plans (EHCPs) and has been used as a proxy for the required measure. Actuals reflect recorded spend, with future years based on current cost assumptions and small growth with increases from 2-5% depending on provision. No unit cost for Hospital Placements as no Children and Young People (Cyp) identified at census point in relation to spend in table 1. No unit cost for Mainstream due to Element 3/Top up funding now being paid on a cohort funded model rather than individual Children and Young People (Cyp) - schools / academies provide the Council with a graduated provision map covering all SEND provision within their settings for those with & without an Education Health Care Plan (EHCP) - they are expected to contribute their Notional SEN allocation and Element 3 funding tops-up the remaining provision. The funding is not identified to individual children and supports an inclusion approach. Graduated Provision Maps are reviewed through the Team Around the School approach to improve efficiency and effectiveness of offers, as well as adaptation where needs of children change. In 2026-27, Alterative Provision placements unit costs increase due to a number of former grants ,Core School Budget Grant and Teachers Pay and Pension Grant (Csbg, Tpg and Tpecg) being consolidated into the High Needs Block inflating the unit cost. So driven by funding rather than underlying price changes. In 2027-28 capacity expands but phased openings result in part year costs, meaning volume rises but the average cost is suppressed, with the effect expected to normalise once provision is fully operational.

Unit costs include place and top-up funding. Post 16 includes notional (element 2) and top-up funding (element 3).

3 Forecast SEN transport expenditure Amber Green

Forecasts are based on current SEN transport arrangements, with year-on-year changes reflecting observed and modelled variations in costs rather than a fixed uplift. A baseline inflation assumption has been included; however, the Council’s approach is to refresh forecasts annually through the budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy (Mtfs) process, reflecting the latest transport cost intelligence given recent volatility in the market following COVID-19 and wider economic pressures. No growth in demand or increased access has been assumed, and figures do not yet reflect the impact of new provision or changes to existing settings. The forecast also assumes delivery of £2m cumulative savings across 2026- 27 and 2027-28, driven by more children remaining in mainstream settings and increased access to specialist provision closer to home, building on savings achieved to date. Transport costs and associated savings will continue to be actively managed and kept under review through the Council's Medium-Term Financial Strategy (Mtfs) process.

Home to School Transport costs remain a significant and volatile pressure. Expenditure is particularly sensitive to external market factors, most notably fuel prices, which directly influence operator contract rates and inflationary uplifts. Increases in fuel costs can lead to higher route and contract costs, limited provider capacity, and reduced ability to secure competitive pricing, particularly in rural areas.

4 Current and projected number of all Cyp in local area categorised by age Green

Numbers of Cyp is based on data provided by East of England Child Health Information Service. Data is taken from the SystmOne Child Health reporting unit up to 18 years. Data for 18-25 is modelled from Ons population predictions.

Official# 16 Total planned LA and Icb spend on professionals Red

Despite the Educational Psychologist (Ep) workforce figures reflecting no growth in capacity in future years, the financial position shows a significant increase between the 2025/26 outturn and the 2026/27 budget. This variance is primarily driven by vacancies within Ep roles during 2025/26 (the Fte shown is the year-end snapshot following recruitment) that resulted in a significant underspend and suppressed the reported outturn, rather than reflecting any underlying increase in demand, service expansion, or planned workforce growth. The variance is partially offset by previously planned contribution to the savings target agreed prior to SEND reform announcements.

The Educational Psychologist (Ep) workforce is complex with the use of employed and contracted staff, as well as locum workers for some statutory work. The spend shown is only that on the employed workforce, as per the data request guidance, and does not include additional spend that exceeded that underspend through locums (and their equivalent Fte is excluded). The LA has a further savings target in relation to improving efficiency in ways of working using technology to reduce the reliance on the locum workforce, which means that, overall, the LA had budgeted to reduce spend on EPs in 2026-27.

2025–26 reflects actual expenditure and approved workforce budgets, with future years modelled using a 3% annual inflationary uplift only. The Education Psychology (Ep) budget includes a proportion of a saving committed prior to the Government SEND reform announcements in relation to increasing effectiveness in ways of working. No additional workforce growth, service expansion or changes to commissioning arrangements are assumed prior to use of the Experts at Hand grant.

Speech and Language Therapy (Salt) provision is delivered via the East Coast Community Health Care (Ecchc) contract with a 60%–40% Icb cost sharing arrangement, assumed to continue. Occupational Therapy (Ot) provision is delivered through block contracts across acute and community providers; however, the Icb is currently unable to disaggregate activity or costs relating specifically to Cyp with SEN without EHCPs within these arrangements.

The projections related to Expert at Hands funding presume that workforce increases will happen on a linear basis during 2027-28 and 2028-29, and this is reflected in the spend forecasts. This is not to delay workforce recruitment, but to attempt to reflect a realistic scenario given the current national workforce challenges.

The Icb does not commission Educational Psychology services, and therefore no Icb expenditure is included for EPs. Icb contributions for Salt reflect jointly commissioned community services only. NHS Norfolk and Suffolk Icb has confirmed that additional SEND reform funding (Experts at Hand) will build on existing capacity and support multi agency working, and will not be used to offset current spend or provision within block contracts or universal services. Assumptions will be reviewed as further information becomes available.

As above (data return section 15 comment), the increase in spend shown in the table does not reflect the total Experts at Hand investment due to the fact that these are only three job roles and our proposals seek to take a pragmatic approach to the identifying skillsets and job roles and our proposals seek to take a pragmatic approach to the identifying skillsets and job roles that can bring expertise into Norfolk's system along with consideration of expertise that we have already invested in (e.g. in relation to therapists, we have recently invested in Salt but not in OTs and, thus, a bigger investment in OTs is planned), whilst considering existing workforce challenges nationally and reflecting that all LAs will be seeking the similar resources. As detailed in section 2 of our plan, additionally, some job roles are not budgeted as posts (e.g. specialist outreach from Specialist Resource Bases).

Future years are modelled using a 3% annual inflationary uplift only and no additional workforce growth, service expansion or changes to commissioning arrangements are assumed prior to any additional posts funded by the Experts at Hand grant. Posts funded through Experts at Hand are estimates based upon initial service design that will be refined as detailed service delivery planning and implementation work is undertaken. This may mean amendments required in future quarterly reporting.

17 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Speech & Language Specialists and support workers Amber Red

2025–26 reflects the actual position. Prior to additional Experts at Hand funded roles, it was presumed that future years would be held broadly flat, as increases in access could not be assumed within existing resource. While demand for Speech and Language Therapy assessments has risen over recent years, this model does not assume that this will translate into increased numbers supported without corresponding changes in capacity.

It should be noted that it is unclear how the number of Cyp effectively supported can be counted, given the focus on the model of specialists supporting school based staff and those staff having contact with many children that the support may impact upon. Further work is needed to identify an approach

Future growth is based upon additional roles funded through Experts at Hand grant to strengthen and work alongside the current balanced model approach. At this initial stage, high level assumptions have been made that the experts at hand offer will have an impact upon 80% of Cyp at SEN Support without an EHCP or specialist placement, due to the approach of specialists supporting school based staff increase confidence and capability, in turn having a positive impact upon multiple children. the Detailed service design and implementation planning is still to be completed and this may provide further clarity regarding the presumed 'reach' of these roles, which may mean that projections are amended in future quarterly reporting.

The rate of growth is based upon an initial impact following initial recruitment in 26/27 from the current baseline , and then building up towards the 80% metric over the next two years.

18 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Occupational Therapists and support workers Amber Red

2025–26 reflects the estimated current position. Prior to additional Experts at Hand funded roles, it was presumed that future years would be held broadly flat, as increases in access could not be assumed within existing resource. While demand for Occupational Therapy may grow, this model does not assume this will translate into higher numbers supported without additional capacity. Age distribution is based on the 2025 EHCP cohort and used as a proxy due to limited SEN Support data. This will be reviewed as further data and clarity on EatH and the local offer emerge.

It should be noted that it is unclear how the number of Cyp effectively supported can be counted, given the focus on the model of specialists supporting school based staff and those staff having contact with many children that the support may impact upon. Further work is needed to identify an approach

Future growth is based upon additional roles funded through Experts at Hand grant to strengthen and work alongside the current balanced model approach. At this initial stage, high level assumptions have been made that the experts at hand offer will have an impact upon 80% of Cyp at SEN Support without an EHCP or specialist placement, due to the approach of specialists supporting school based staff increase confidence and capability, in turn having a positive impact upon multiple children. the Detailed service design and implementation planning is still to be completed and this may provide further clarity regarding the presumed 'reach' of these roles, which may mean that projections are amended in future quarterly reporting.

The rate of growth is based upon an initial impact following initial recruitment in 26/27 from the current baseline , and then building up towards the 80% metric over the next two years. The impact for Ot is expected to grow quickly, given the current low workforce and Cyp supported and the scale of the investment and type of whole-class or whole-school intervention and support that is anticipated.

19 Number of Cyp without EHCP or specialist placement supported by Educational Psychologists and support workers Amber Red

2025–26 reflects the activity baseline for Educational Psychologists. Prior to additional Experts at Hand funded roles, it was presumed that future years would be held broadly flat, as increases in access could not be assumed within existing resource. While a shift in focus towards early intervention may occur as the existing Sism model embeds, this does not assume an increase in the number of Cyp supported without EHCPs without additional resource.

It should be noted that it is unclear how the number of Cyp effectively supported can be counted, given the focus on the model of specialists supporting school based staff and those staff having contact with many children that the support may impact upon. Further work is needed to identify an approach

Future growth is based upon additional roles funded through Experts at Hand grant to strengthen and work alongside the current balanced model approach. At this initial stage, high level assumptions have been made that the experts at hand offer will have an impact upon 80% of Cyp at SEN Support without an EHCP or specialist placement, due to the approach of specialists supporting school based staff increase confidence and capability, in turn having a positive impact upon multiple children. the Detailed service design and implementation planning is still to be completed and this may provide further clarity regarding the presumed 'reach' of these roles, which may mean that projections are amended in future quarterly reporting.

The rate of growth is based upon an initial impact following initial recruitment in 26/27 from the current baseline , and then building up towards the 80% metric over the next two years.

20 Proportion of appeals to tribunals Amber Green

2025 3.9% 2026 4.1% 2027 4.3% 2028 4.5% 2029 4.1%. These numbers are added to line 414 in the data return as there is a cell issue within the form.

Appendix K

Number of all Cyp - 0-25 Number of statutory school age children Population assumptions fixed at 2026:

123885 251491

Assumtion that School age chort will be 62% of total number of EHCPs

Scenario 1 Growth in EHCP rate slows in Norfolk and meets national rate by 2029 (7.7% in 2029) Scenario 2 Growth in EHCP rate slows in Norfolk but slightly exceeds national rate by 2029 (7.95% in 2029) Scenario 3 Growth in EHCP rate continues in Norfolk but at a slower rate and remains at a higher rate than national (8.2% in 2029) Scenario 4 Growth in EHCP rate continues at same pace as national projections (+2.4% to 9% by 2029)