To gather a useful parent contribution before an EHCP annual review, start early, explain how it will be used, offer more than one accessible way to respond, and ask specific questions about change, progress, provision and priorities.
Record what the parent says faithfully, keep their views distinct from the school's interpretation, and circulate the contribution with the other advice at least two weeks before the meeting.
This guide is for schools in England. It is accurate on 2 August 2026 and is not legal advice. Follow the current local authority process while meeting the national statutory requirements.
Why parent contribution is part of the review, not an extra
Section 19 of the Children and Families Act 2014 requires local authorities to have regard to the views, wishes and feelings of the child and parent, and to support their participation in decisions.
Regulation 20 of the SEND Regulations 2014 requires the child's parent or the young person to be invited. The organiser must seek advice and information from invitees and circulate it at least two weeks before the meeting.
The SEND Code of Practice says reviews must be undertaken in partnership and take account of views, wishes and feelings. It also says schools should make parents confident that their knowledge is valued and acted upon.
A blank form sent shortly before the deadline is therefore a poor collection method. It is rather like reserving a chair and forgetting to open the door.
Use a six-step parent contribution process
- Set the internal date. Work back from the two-week circulation point and allow time for a reminder, an accessible alternative and a factual check.
- Explain the purpose. Say what the annual review will consider, who will receive the contribution and how differences of view will be recorded.
- Offer a choice of route.Use a short form, email, telephone call, video meeting or supported conversation according to the family's preference.
- Ask focused questions. Invite observations about progress, current needs, provision, outcomes, aspirations and anything that has changed.
- Follow up proportionately. Check delivery, make one or more reasonable attempts through an agreed channel, and record the outcome without blame.
- Confirm and circulate. Let the parent check a note taken by staff, then share it with the review papers in line with the statutory timetable.
Six weeks before the meeting is a useful planning point, not a national statutory deadline. Derbyshire's May 2026 school guidance uses six weeks for gathering advice and four weeks for chasing, but local processes vary.
Give parents a useful prompt, not an essay assignment
Use ordinary language and explain that short examples are welcome. Ask for what the family has noticed, not a professional report. A parent contribution is evidence from a different setting and relationship, not unpaid casework.
| Prompt | What it helps the review test |
|---|---|
| What is going well at home, school or in the community? | Strengths, progress and conditions that support success |
| What has changed since the last review? | Needs, circumstances, health, independence or aspirations |
| Which support seems helpful, unhelpful or inconsistent? | Whether provision remains appropriate and is being delivered |
| What does your child say matters to them? | A pointer to gather the child or young person's own voice separately |
| What should be different over the next year? | Priorities, outcomes and preparation for the next stage |
| Is anything in the current plan inaccurate or unclear? | Corrections, disagreement and possible amendments |
Keep the child or young person's views separate. The Code says a parent's view must not be used as a proxy for a young person's view. Both may be relevant, and they do not have to be identical.
Make the invitation accessible
Ask how the parent prefers to communicate. Offer an interpreter, accessible format, extra processing time or a supported conversation where needed. Do not treat a long written form as the test of whether a family wishes to contribute.
Explain who will see the information and avoid asking for unrelated personal detail. Store the response in the controlled review record, with access limited to people who need it for the process.
If staff take notes during a call, label the source and date, separate direct words from summary, and send the note back for correction. A tidy sentence should not quietly acquire an opinion the parent did not express.
Follow up without turning silence into a judgement
Check that the invitation reached the correct contact and that the route is usable. Record the date, channel and result of each attempt. Try the agreed alternative where there is one, while keeping the statutory process moving.
No response does not prove disengagement, agreement or lack of concern. Work, care, language, accessibility, trust and an overenthusiastic spam filter can all affect the route. Record what is known and leave motives alone.
If the parent contributes at the meeting, minute the substance and any requested correction or action. If views differ, record the difference clearly. Regulation 20 expects the report to refer to differing recommendations.
The connected-data view: family context changes the question
Consider a fictional composite pupil. The school's attendance view shows several late arrivals, while provision records say planned sensory breaks were delivered on most days. Neither record explains the pattern.
The parent contribution says the pupil needs a long recovery after days with several room changes and struggles most on mornings after those days. This does not prove a cause, but it changes the professional question.
The SENCo can ask whether room changes, break timing, sleep, transport or another factor should be explored. The next action might be a short agreed adjustment trial, an observation, and a review date with named owners.
Connected records cannot diagnose a sensory need, prove why a pupil was late, or show that one factor caused another. They support enquiry and review.
The pupil's own view, professional evidence and family context still need to be considered directly.
How Student Radar can support the workflow
Student Radar's Annual Review keeps dates, readiness, tasks and supporting documents visible. Its public workflow includes requesting and distributing documents for the meeting.
The pupil profile's Communication log can keep calls, messages and attempted contacts in an ordered timeline. Where the Connect package is enabled, structured questions and responses can support targeted family outreach.
A SENCo still decides what to ask, checks the captured contribution, records differences and judges the next action. Software does not turn a response into proof or make an annual review compliant by itself.
Next actions for the SENCo
- Check the local annual review form and submission route.
- Set a contribution date before the statutory circulation point.
- Offer at least two workable response routes.
- Use the six prompts and invite short, concrete examples.
- Track delivery, follow-up, receipt and parent confirmation.
- Keep parent voice, pupil voice and school analysis distinct.
- Circulate the contribution and record any difference of view.
- Give each agreed action an owner and review date.
Use the annual review countdown to place this work in the statutory timetable.
Keep the family contribution beside, but distinct from, the pupil voice and the school's Assess, Plan, Do, Review evidence.
Sources and further reading
- Children and Families Act 2014, section 19, UK Parliament, enacted 13 March 2014; revised text checked 2 August 2026.
- Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014, regulation 20, UK Parliament, made 4 June 2014; revised text checked 2 August 2026.
- SEND code of practice: 0 to 25 years, Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care, January 2015; GOV.UK page updated 12 September 2024.
- Annual Review Timeline and Phase Transfer Guidance, Derbyshire County Council, May 2026.
- Children and the UK GDPR, Information Commissioner's Office, updated 15 May 2026.