Today, we are publishing an initial collection of anonymous testimonies from families across England who have experienced unlawful, unethical, or harmful behaviour while trying to secure Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) support for their children.
This publication is the first output from our national data collection campaign. It offers both a sobering account of the systemic failures leaving children without education and families without support, and a rare public record of the culture and conduct of Local Authorities in their administration of statutory SEND support — as described directly by families.
High-Level Thematic Review
The hundreds of submissions we have received reveal a consistent and disturbing national picture. While the ongoing national discussion often frames the challenges of the SEND system as a failure of the legal framework, these testimonies point to a different and more concerning truth: a systemic and normalised pattern of Local Authority (LA) maladministration and misconduct.
Our initial keyword analysis of the testimonies shows a striking pattern of reported issues. The most frequently cited keywords relate to:
- Maladministration and Unethical Behaviour
The data shows that “ignored” is flagged in 20% of testimonies, while “lied” is present in 18%. This indicates a pervasive issue with a combative and obstructive culture, suggesting that the problem is not simply one of “system strain,” but a fundamental breakdown in public service ethics. - A Legal System Overwhelmed by Abuse of Process
The term “Refused” appears in 17% of the testimonies, highlighting the frequent and often baseless denial of statutory support. Families describe an endless cycle of routine, cynical, and legally indefensible refusals of statutory support, forcing them repetitively into prolonged and costly legal battles. - A Pervasive Accountability Vacuum
Keywords like “distress” (15%), “trauma” (12%), and “mental health” (11%) are highly prevalent throughout family testimonies. This data confirms that the lack of accountability and the cycle of systemic failure are inflicting significant and measurable harm on children and their families, with long-term consequences far beyond the immediate denial of services.
Additionally, since commencing 4 weeks ago, this initial data set already comprises a staggering 474 testimonies spanning 98 Local Authorities across all 9 regions of England with hundreds of pages of submissions.
While this is not a randomised sampling exercise – and the volume of submissions varies greatly between LAs – it undoubtedly demonstrates that this is not an isolated issue. The widespread geographical representation points to a systemic, national problem that transcends local boundaries, political leadership, and policy decisions
Selected Testimonies
The following summarised examples are representative of the collective experience documented in this publication:
- Undisclosed LA:
“Caseworkers have consistently ignored all forms of communication. We were forced into a long and expensive battle simply to get our daughter, who has a brain injury and other conditions, the EHCP she needed.” - Undisclosed LA:
“We were told we didn’t qualify for respite because their son’s difficulties were due to a ‘lack of boundaries, not disability’. The whole family is now struggling with the parent’s loss of income and deteriorating mental and physical health.” - Surrey:
Parent to three children with EHCPs has been forced into tribunal seven times and has had to submit multiple complaints to the LGSCO. They describe their harrowing journey – have been lied to, ignored, and their children have been denied an education, and they are now suffering from long-term illnesses and full mental health breakdown as a result of the ordeal. Crucially – they associate the worst impact is related to the way they have been treated by the Local Authority through this experience, rather than resource limitations. - West Sussex:
Parent describes a horrendous experience with communication where their Case Officer has changed five times without notice or communication. Their child has been out of school for seven months, and no one from the LA has had contact with the child in that time. The family lost their home and the child has since become agoraphobic with suicidal thoughts. - Barnsley:
“The LA failed to agree to an EHCP despite overwhelming evidence, leading to a tribunal that they conceded just one month before the hearing. Our child has been out of school for nine months with no provision.”
Next Steps
These testimonies make one point absolutely clear: the ongoing conversation around SEND reform is squarely focusing on the wrong problem.
The issue is not an ‘adversarial legal framework’ – the current legal framework overwhelmingly provides the correct, essential educational support when it is allowed to function. The real problem is the damaging and unlawful conduct of Local Authorities: routine maladministration, abuse of legal process, and a culture of obstruction that has been normalised, leaving families trapped in endless legal battles simply to enforce rights they already hold.
We are continuing to collect testimonies and expand this dataset, building a comprehensive, evidence-based picture of the crisis. A further summary will shortly be published, setting out recommended next steps for escalating these issues so that they cannot be ignored or misrepresented in the national debate on SEND reform.
In the meantime, we maintain our call for an independent, judge-led inquiry into the culture, conduct, and governance of Local Authorities in their handling of SEND.
Nothing short of this will restore trust in public services and ensure a fairer, lawful, transparent, and publicly accountable system of local government moving forward.
Measure what Matters.
About this document
This publication contains anonymised testimonies submitted by families about their experiences with Local Authorities in relation to SEND. Testimonies are reproduced verbatim and have not been independently verified. They represent the contributors’ own words and perspectives.
⚠️ Content warning: Some testimonies describe highly distressing experiences.
Measure What Matters reserves the right to remove or amend any testimony if concerns are raised (e.g., potential inaccuracies, safeguarding issues, or legal concerns).
This document may be linked or cited for non-commercial purposes, provided it is shared in full and with this disclaimer. Please do not copy or redistribute individual testimonies separately without prior consent, as doing so risks removing essential context and safeguarding protections.
Queries about the data: contact writetome@measurewhatmatters.blog.
Awaiting Updated File: Due 16.10.2025
Measure what matters. 
Leave a comment