Definition
An Individual Education Plan is a non-statutory written plan that sets out a child's SEND targets, the support being put in place, and how progress will be measured. The 2014 reforms moved most schools away from IEPs to provision maps and one-page profiles, but many primary schools still use IEPs as the working document of the graduated approach.
In context for parents
Key checkpoints
- IEP is a non-statutory written plan setting out a child's SEND targets, support, and progress measure.
- The 2014 reforms moved most schools to provision maps and one-page profiles, but many primary schools still use IEPs.
- A good IEP states 3–4 specific, measurable targets per term plus intervention, frequency, deliverer, and success criteria.
- IEP is not legally binding; the EHCP is the legal document and the IEP is a working tool.
- Where IEP and Section F EHCP diverge, Section F takes precedence.
IEPs predate the 2014 reforms. The 2001 SEN Code of Practice required schools to write an IEP for each child on School Action or School Action Plus; the 2015 SEND Code of Practice removed that requirement and replaced it with the more flexible "graduated approach" recorded on a provision map. Some schools dropped IEPs entirely; others kept them as the working document because they are easier to use in conversation with parents and teaching staff than an abstract provision map.
A good IEP states three or four specific, measurable targets for the term; the intervention(s) being used; the frequency, person, and place of delivery; and the success criteria. Example target: "By end of summer term, Adam will use a five-word sentence with subject-verb-object in 8 out of 10 structured opportunities in his daily SaLT-supervised intervention." That is enforceable and reviewable. "Adam will improve his communication" is neither.
What an IEP is not:
- It is not the EHCP.
- It is not legally binding.
- It does not give the parent a right of appeal if the school fails to deliver it.
- The IEP's value is operational: it tells the teacher, TA, parent, and SENCO what is happening today.
Where the school has an EHCP for a child, the IEP should reflect the Section F provision rather than running parallel to it. Where the IEP and Section F do not match, the IEP loses (the EHCP is the legal document and the IEP is a working tool).
Related terms
The terms parents most often see alongside Individual Education Plan.
Provision Map
A school's record of the SEND interventions and provision in place for individuals, groups, and year groups. Used to plan, monitor, and evidence the impact of support.
One-Page Profile
A short, child-centred document summarising what people appreciate about a pupil, what's important to them, and how best to support them. Often shared with every adult who works with the child.
SEN Support
The graduated approach used by schools to support children with SEND who do not have an EHCP. SEN Support follows an assess-plan-do-review cycle.
Special Educational Needs Coordinator(SENCO)
The qualified teacher in a school responsible for the day-to-day operation of the SEND policy, coordinating provision, and liaising with parents and outside professionals.
Where parents ask about this
Parents usually find this page before a termly review meeting where the school's IEP is on the table, or when the IEP and the EHCP appear to be diverging. Searches include "IEP target examples SEN", "is an IEP legally binding", and "IEP versus EHCP". A Beaakon SENCO can audit your child's IEP, sharpen the targets to a tribunal-readable standard, and align it with Section F if your child has an EHCP.
References
The primary legislation, statutory guidance, research, and clinical tools this page draws on.