What makes an EHCP outcome measurable

"Amir will develop his communication skills" sounds reasonable in a draft. Twelve months later, at the annual review, nobody can say whether it has been achieved. This guide sets out what the rules require and how to turn a vague outcome into one you can check.

What the rules say

An EHC plan is a plan specifying, among other things, "the outcomes sought for him or her" (Children and Families Act 2014, section 37(2)(b)). The SEND Regulations 2014 require those outcomes to sit in their own section, Section E (regulation 12(1)(e)).

The SEND Code of Practice adds the detail. Paragraph 9.61 says outcomes in EHC plans "should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-bound)". Paragraph 9.66 defines an outcome as "the benefit or difference made to an individual as a result of an intervention", and says it:

• "should be personal and not expressed from a service perspective"
• "should be something that those involved have control and influence over"

The Code's own wording matters here. It explains that "should" means the guidance "must be considered" and that anyone who departs from it "will be expected to explain any departure from it".

Measurability matters most at review. Paragraph 9.166 says reviews "must focus on the child or young person's progress towards achieving the outcomes specified in the EHC plan". If the outcome cannot be measured, the review has nothing firm to look at.

Outcome, provision or aspiration?

Provision is not an outcome. Paragraph 9.66 is direct: "the provision of three hours of speech and language therapy is not an outcome." The outcome is "what it is intended that the speech and language therapy will help the individual to do that they cannot do now and by when this will be achieved." The table in the Code that follows paragraph 9.69 ('What to include in each section of the EHC plan') asks for "a clear distinction between outcomes and provision" in Section E.

An aspiration is not an outcome. Paragraph 9.65 says "Long-term aspirations are not outcomes in themselves – aspirations must be specified in Section A". "Leah wants to work with animals" belongs in Section A. Section E holds the steps that move her towards it.

A short-term target is not usually an outcome. Paragraph 9.68 says outcomes "will usually set out what needs to be achieved by the end of a phase or stage of education". Paragraph 9.69 covers shorter-term targets set by the school, which can be reviewed and "amended regularly". The Code suggests these be appended to the plan "wherever possible".

Four questions to ask of every outcome

1. Whose outcome is it? It should describe what the pupil will do, not what staff will provide.
2. What will you see or hear? Use an observable action ("asks for help using his card") rather than an internal state ("feels more confident").
3. How will you know? Say what counts as achieved: how often, in what setting, and with how much help. Include the starting point, so the change is visible.
4. By when? Name an end point, usually the end of a key stage or phase, as paragraph 9.68 suggests.

Before and after

All pupils below are fictional.

Amir, Year 4, speech, language and communication needs

Before: Amir will develop his communication skills.

After: By the end of Year 6, Amir will start a conversation with a familiar classmate at playtime and keep it going for at least four turns, without an adult prompting him, in three of five observed playtimes. (He currently joins in when an adult sets up the game, and rarely starts a conversation himself.)

This follows the example in paragraph 9.67, where what matters to the child "may be that they want to be able to talk to their friends and join in their games at playtime."

Leah, Year 8, written by a service rather than for the pupil

Before: Leah will receive three hours of speech and language therapy per term.

After: By the end of Year 9, Leah will explain a key word from science or geography in her own words and use it correctly in a written sentence, for at least 8 of 10 words in her end-of-unit vocabulary checks. (In Year 8 she manages about 3 in 10.)

The therapy is still needed. It moves to Section F, where it belongs.

Jayden, Year 7, autism and executive function difficulties

Before: Jayden will become more independent.

After: By the end of Year 9, Jayden will get from the school gate to his tutor room and lay out what he needs for the day, using his visual checklist, with no more than one adult prompt, on four days out of five.

Sophie, Year 5, social, emotional and mental health needs

Before: Sophie will be happy and settled in school.

After: By the end of Year 6, when she feels anxious, Sophie will name how she is feeling using her 1 to 5 scale and choose a calming strategy from her agreed list, in at least four of five occasions recorded by her key adult.

"Happy" cannot be checked; the behaviour that shows she is coping can.

Common traps

• Numbers with no baseline. "80% accuracy" means little if nobody recorded where the pupil started.
• Outcomes nobody controls. Paragraph 9.66 asks for outcomes that those involved "have control and influence over". "Will achieve a grade 5 in maths" may depend on things outside the plan. "Will be able to solve two-step problems with a calculator" does not.
• Outcomes with no matching provision. Paragraph 9.68 says "The provision should enable the outcomes to be achieved." If no line in Section F would plausibly lead to the outcome, one of the two needs to change.

A short checklist

• The outcome describes the pupil, not a service.
• It says what you will see or hear the pupil do.
• It says what counts as achieved, and in what setting.
• The starting point is recorded, here or in Section B.
• There is an end date, usually the end of a phase or key stage.
• Aspirations are in Section A, provision is in Section F.
• Shorter-term targets are recorded by the school and, where possible, appended.
• At least one Section F provision clearly leads to this outcome.

Sendix checks EHCPs for wording that is too vague to deliver or review, cites the rule it relies on, and drafts a fix that the practitioner can accept, edit or reject.