The uneven distribution of pupils with SEND in mainstream schools

This project explored the reasons why pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) cluster across certain mainstream schools in England, and what this unevenness means for schools, pupils and families. 

Methodology 

The project involved quantitative analysis of the National Pupil Database, a nationally representative survey of 800 special educational needs co-ordinators (SENCOs) and senior school leaders, and in-depth interviews with ‘high-SEND’ case study schools, comparison schools, parents, and local authorities (LAs). 

Key findings 

• The uneven distribution of pupils with SEND across mainstream schools is stark and growing. In 2024/25, primary schools in the quartile with the highest rates of Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) had around six times as many pupils with EHCPs as those in the lowest quartile, with a fivefold difference in secondary schools. 

• Pupils with SEND are pulled towards certain schools with strong reputations for inclusion and pushed towards them when capacity in other schools (including special schools) is constrained. Some schools resist enrolling pupils with SEND due to capacity pressures or concerns about performance measures. 

• ‘High-SEND’ schools develop stronger inclusive practice, expertise and cultures, but also suffer intense staffing, workload and financial pressures, as well as increased behavioural and safeguarding risks. Staff and parents felt that it was sometimes impossible to manage certain pupils’ needs safely and effectively within ordinary classroom environments and staffing ratios. 

• The evidence on the effectiveness of inclusion bases (also known as ‘SEN Units’ and ‘Resourced Provision’) is currently mixed. Only a third of secondary schools and fewer than half of primary schools who reported having an inclusion base in the survey said that it could meet the needs of all pupils who accessed it. Significant proportions of staff also reported weak joint working between base and mainstream staff and limited pupil interaction across the base–mainstream boundary. 

Policy Recommendations 

• Monitor the distribution of pupils with SEND and prioritise a more even spread across mainstream schools, so that both the benefits and pressures of an inclusive environment are more equally shared. 

• Amend accountability and inspection frameworks so that schools are incentivised to admit pupils with SEND even if this may have a negative effect on other performance measures. 

• Where integration and inclusion remain uneven, funding should better match patterns of need across schools so that inclusive practice is properly resourced rather than goodwill-based. 

• Publish clear, evidence-based guidance for the implementation of inclusion bases, and commission ongoing evaluation to support improvement and avoid the replication of weak or unsustainable models. 

• Be explicit that mainstream schools, including inclusion bases, cannot meet every pupil’s needs, and plan sufficient specialist places accordingly.