Skip to content

    Check the EHCP your setting has to deliver.

    Find EHCP wording too vague to deliver or review, see the rule behind it, and approve or reject a fix.

    Examples for
    Fictional EHCP · Ava, Year 51 target flagged

    Section E outcome, as written

    Ava will make progress with her communication skills over time.

    Why it’s flagged

    No skill, starting point, measure or date to review it against.

    Statutory guidanceSEND Code of Practice 2015, para 9.66: outcomes should be SMART. (opens the source in a new tab)

    Proposed change · you decide

    Deleted: Ava will make progress with her communication skills over time. Inserted: By March 2027, Ava will follow a two-step spoken instruction in class without it being repeated, in four out of five observed opportunities. This term it is one in five.

    Baseline and measure from the speech and language therapy report in the file.

    Still to confirm

    The file gives the baseline, not the rate of progress, so “four in five by March” needs confirming with Ava’s speech and language therapist.

    For SEND (special educational needs and disabilities) teams in England working on EHCPs, and ASN (additional support needs) teams in Scotland working on Child’s Plans and IEPs. Every example here is fictional.

    What do I take to the council?

    You can’t amend an EHCP yourself. Sendix reads and drafts; you decide and send.

    Outcome

    Provision

    Comes loose at “as required”

    Fictional EHCP · Ava, Year 5 · Section F
    Finding 1 of 2

    Step 1:Flag · F1, as written

    Ava will receive appropriate support for her receptive and expressive language, including vocabulary and spoken instructions, as required.

    Step 2:Cite · why “as required” is flagged

    It leaves someone to judge whether Ava gets the support at all, so it may be hard to hold anyone to.

    LawChildren and Families Act 2014, s.42(2): the council must secure the provision specified. (opens the source in a new tab)

    Step 3:Draft · proposed F1, from Section B2

    • Pre-teach new curriculum vocabulary
    • Trained teaching assistant
    • Word Aware approach
    • 20 minutes, 3 times a week
    • Groups of 4 or fewer
    • Quiet small-group room

    One rewrite answers both flags in F1.

    Read the full wording and its source

    Ava will receive pre-teaching of new curriculum vocabulary from a trained teaching assistant, using the Word Aware approach, for 20 minutes, three times per week, in a group of no more than four pupils, in the small-group room adjoining her classroom where ambient noise stays below 45 decibels.

    Section B2 of the same plan: “School observation and classroom environment data record that Ava learns new curriculum vocabulary when a trained teaching assistant pre-teaches it through the Word Aware approach for 20 minutes, three times per week, in a group of no more than four pupils, in the small-group room adjoining her classroom where measured ambient noise stays below 45 decibels.”

    Step 4:You decide

    Your call: nothing moves until you choose.

    Step 5:Send · what you send the council

    Nothing yet. Decide on F1 and this fills in.

    See this on a plan like yours: book a 30-minute walkthrough (opens cal.com in a new tab)

    Does it only find problems, or help fix them?

    It helps fix them: each fix is drafted from what’s already in the file, and you decide what’s used.

    1. Flag · Underlines the exact wording too vague to deliver or review.

    2. Cite · Names the rule behind it and links to the source.

    3. Draft · Writes a fix from evidence in the file, or asks for the missing report.

    4. You decide · Accept, edit or reject each change.

    5. Send · What you accepted becomes a tracked-changes request to the council.

    Which plans does it cover?

    • EHCP review · England

      Flags, cites, drafts a fix from the file, and exports what you accept.

    • Child’s Plan review · Scotland

      Flags what a field doesn’t yet say, against GIRFEC guidance. You write the wording.

    • IEP review · Scotland

      Checks targets and suggests measurable wording, leaving gaps for your team.

    Sendix works from the plans you upload. It doesn’t connect to SEEMiS or other school management systems, so it holds only what you choose to share.

    Your DPO will have questions. We’ve answered them.

    Read the answers for your DPO
    • Plans stay your school’s. Your school is the data controller. Sendix acts only on its instructions.
    • Sendix staff can’t read plan text. Not through the application. Only your SENCOs, SEND leads and trust SEND lead can.
    • The walkthrough uses a fictional plan. No pupil data, on the call or before it.

    What does it cost? The first step, a check of 2 or 3 fictional EHCPs, is free.How pricing works

    Who has backed Sendix?

    Awards, programme places and support. None of these organisations has evaluated the product’s findings.

    See a plan checked, flag by flag.

    30 minutes with Marcus Kamuntu, founder, on a fictional EHCP or Child’s Plan or IEP.

    What to expect

    • We use a fictional plan. No pupil data, on the call or before it.
    • We show a flag, the rule behind it and the fix, then answer your questions, including your DPO’s.
    • Nothing to sign, and no commitment.
    Book a 30-minute walkthrough (opens cal.com in a new tab)

    Prefer email? hello@sendix.ai, or use the form. We reply within two working days.