Challenging vague wording in Section F
How to spot and challenge vague provision in your child's EHCP, with examples of what good wording looks like.
Challenging vague wording in Section F
Section F is the most important part of your child's EHCP. It sets out the special educational provision your child must receive. If the wording is vague, the support becomes impossible to enforce. 'Access to speech therapy' means nothing if no one can tell you how many hours, how often, or who provides it.
Vague wording in Section F is the most common ground for SEND Tribunal appeals. You can and should challenge it.
What vague wording looks like
Here are common phrases that are too vague:
| Vague wording | The problem |
|---|---|
| 'Access to speech and language therapy' | Does not say how often, for how long, or by whom |
| 'Regular support from a teaching assistant' | Does not specify hours or frequency |
| 'Opportunities for social interaction' | Does not say what, when, or how |
| 'A differentiated curriculum' | Every child in the school gets this |
| 'Support as needed' | Leaves it to the school to decide, with no accountability |
| 'Small group work where appropriate' | No frequency, group size, or who decides when it is appropriate |
What good wording looks like
Good provision is specific, quantified, and deliverable:
| Good wording | Why it works |
|---|---|
| '2 hours per week of 1:1 speech and language therapy, delivered by a qualified speech and language therapist' | Specific hours, frequency, delivery method, and who provides it |
| '15 hours per week of 1:1 support from a trained teaching assistant, under the direction of the SENCO' | Clear hours, role, and supervision arrangement |
| '3 sessions per week of social skills group work (groups of no more than 6 children), each lasting 30 minutes, facilitated by a trained member of staff' | Frequency, group size, duration, and who runs it |
How to challenge
Read Section F line by line. For each piece of provision, ask: Do I know exactly what my child will get, how often, and from whom? If the answer is no, it is too vague.
For each vague item, state: - What the current wording says - Why it is too vague to enforce - What you want it to say instead (be specific)
The SEND Code of Practice (paragraph 9.69) states that provision must be specified and quantified. Section 37(2) of the Children and Families Act 2014 requires provision to be specific. Reference both in your letter.
Set a reasonable deadline for the local authority to respond, such as 15 working days.
Use the EHCP audit tool to find vague wording automatically. It checks every provision statement in Section F and flags anything that is not specific enough.
When to challenge
You can raise concerns about vague wording:
- When you receive a draft EHCP: This is the best time. You have 15 days to comment on the draft before it is finalised.
- At an annual review: Request amendments to any provision that is too vague.
- At any time: You can write to the local authority asking them to amend the EHCP. They must consider your request.
- At tribunal: Vague provision is a strong ground for appeal.
What if the LA refuses to change the wording
If the local authority refuses to make the provision more specific, you can:
- Ask them to explain in writing why they believe the current wording is adequate
- Make a formal complaint
- Appeal to the SEND Tribunal (for the content of Sections B and F)
The tribunal regularly orders local authorities to make provision more specific. This is well-established case law.
The case of L v Clarke and Somerset County Council established that provision in Section F must be specific enough that a parent can hold the local authority to account. If you cannot tell whether the provision is being delivered, the wording is not specific enough.
Try asking this question in a chat:
“Section F of my child's EHCP says 'access to speech therapy'. Can you help me draft a response asking for more specific wording?”