At year end, archive provision records that are complete, carry forward support only where need and intended outcomes remain current, adapt provision when fit or delivery is weak, and stop it only after a recorded professional review.
Check the plan, actual delivery, response, pupil and parent views, cost and next review point. Preserve the old record rather than making the past look tidier than it was.
This guide is for schools in England and is accurate on 23 July 2026. It is not legal advice. Provision specified in an EHC plan needs the statutory review and amendment process, not a summer spreadsheet decision.
Why provision map review matters now
A provision map can become a museum of good intentions. By July, some rows describe support that ended months ago, while others roll forward because nobody wants to be the person who deletes the green cell.
The SEND Code of Practice says support and interventions should be reviewed on the agreed date. Their impact and quality should be evaluated with the pupil and parents, then revised in light of progress and development.
Schools choose their own approach to record keeping. A provision map is useful, but it is not itself a statutory form. The Code says provision for pupils with SEN should be accurately recorded and kept up to date.
Section 66 of the Children and Families Act 2014 requires relevant schools and settings in England to use their best endeavours to secure special educational provision for pupils with SEN.
That duty is a reason to review carefully, not to preserve every old activity. No relevant official development in the previous 72 hours changed this framework.
Use four decisions, not one rollover button
Review each pupil-level provision line against current evidence. A whole-school offer may continue while one pupil's participation, dosage or goal changes.
| Decision | Use it when | Record before closing | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Archive | The provision period and review are complete | Dates, delivery, review judgement and reason | Keep a read-only history linked to the pupil |
| Carry forward | Need, outcome and approach remain current | Fresh start, end and review dates with an owner | Confirm staffing, timetable and family understanding |
| Adapt | The goal remains, but fit or delivery needs to change | Barrier, evidence, agreed change and success measure | Alter dosage, group, method, timing or support |
| Stop | The outcome is met, need has changed, or review supports replacement | Final judgement, views, transition and monitoring plan | Close deliberately and watch the agreed indicators |
Check six evidence questions
1. Is the intended outcome still current?
Start with the pupil's current needs, strengths and agreed outcome. Do not carry forward a provision because its name sounds suitable. Ask what barrier it addresses and what meaningful change is expected.
2. What was actually delivered?
Compare planned frequency, duration, staffing and group size with session records. Missing delivery may explain a weak response. It does not show that the approach itself failed.
Record cancellations, late starts and staffing changes honestly. A perfect timetable is not evidence of delivery, however symmetrical the coloured blocks appear.
3. What changed, and how confident are you?
Review progress towards the agreed outcome using the measures chosen at planning. Include observations, work, assessment and participation where relevant.
Separate “no evidence collected” from “no progress”. Separate early promise from a well-established pattern. The EEF notes that doing an intervention is not a success criterion in itself.
4. What do the pupil and parents say?
Ask what helped, what felt difficult, what transferred into class and what the pupil wants adults to understand next term. Use an accessible communication method rather than treating one unanswered question as a view.
Share the evidence and proposed decision with parents. The Code expects support and outcomes to be revised in consultation with the parent and pupil.
5. Is the provision feasible and proportionate?
Check staffing, timetable, training, space and cost. Cost matters for planning, but a high cost is not evidence that support is ineffective or a reason to ignore a statutory duty.
If delivery depends on a person or room that will not exist in September, redesign it now. A provision cannot be carried forward by typing the same sentence into a new date range.
6. What would change the decision?
Give the September plan a review date, owner, success measure and threshold for action. State what evidence would lead the team to sustain, adapt, pause, replace or seek specialist advice.
A safe end-of-year decision sequence
- Freeze the current view and preserve its history.
- Remove duplicates and flag missing dates, owners, delivery or review evidence.
- Review the six questions with the teacher and relevant staff.
- Involve the pupil and parents in the proposed next step.
- Choose archive, carry forward, adapt or stop for each provision line.
- Record the reason, evidence, owner, September start and next review date.
- Check EHC plan provision separately through the statutory process.
- Sample the new map after timetables and staffing are confirmed.
The connected-data view
Consider a fictional composite pupil receiving a targeted literacy provision. The outcome review is mixed, so the provision map alone appears to present a choice between carrying forward and stopping.
Session records show disrupted delivery. Attendance is broadly stable, but several scheduled sessions clashed with a lesson the pupil values. Pupil voice says the smaller group helps when it happens at a workable time.
The professional question is: has the approach had a fair test in a form the pupil can access? The action is to adapt timing and delivery, agree a short review point and retain the original record.
The evidence does not prove that the provision will work, that attendance caused the mixed outcome, or that one timetable change is sufficient. It supports a more precise next question.
What the data cannot prove
Progress after a provision does not prove that the provision caused it. Limited progress does not prove that a pupil lacks effort, that staff delivered poorly, or that a particular need is absent.
Cost per pupil cannot measure dignity, belonging or access. Attendance at sessions cannot show whether learning transferred into the classroom. A dashboard should prompt enquiry, not manufacture a verdict.
Do not use a map clean-up to amend provision specified in section F of an EHC plan. Verify the current plan and work with the local authority through the proper review and amendment route.
How Student Radar supports the review
In Student Radar, the Provision Map brings review dates, cost detail and professional impact judgements into the provision view. Records remain connected to the pupil rather than becoming a detached summer file.
Outcome Tracking records evidence, confidence and next steps against targets. The Intervention Planner connects planned sessions, attendance, delivery notes and review decisions.
These views can surface gaps and assemble evidence. They do not decide whether support should stop, replace professional review or change the duties attached to an EHC plan.
Next actions for the SENCo
- Export or snapshot the current map with access controls intact.
- Assign each provision line one of the four review decisions.
- Return any line with weak evidence to the six questions.
- Confirm pupil and parent involvement before finalising next steps.
- Give every continuing or adapted provision an owner and review date.
- Archive closed records without erasing the evidence trail.
Use the SEND provision impact report guide for the leadership summary, and the SEND register history guide when correcting wider record problems.
To see a connected provision review in context, request a focused Student Radar walkthrough.
Sources and further reading
- Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care, SEND code of practice: 0 to 25 years, published 11 June 2014, statutory guidance dated January 2015, page updated 12 September 2024.
- Children and Families Act 2014, section 66, UK Parliament, 2014.
- Department for Education, SEN and disabilities: guidance for school governing boards, updated 3 February 2025.
- Education Endowment Foundation, Selecting Interventions for pupils with SEND, intervention selection resource, tool uploaded 10 April 2025.
- Education Endowment Foundation, A structured, but flexible, implementation process, published 24 April 2024.