Sandwell SEND: Reform, Red Flags and the Real Test of Trust

Sandwell has entered what it calls a new phase in SEND transformation.

In February 2026, Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council announced a structured reform programme, the appointment of external specialists, and renewed focus on SEND governance, Alternative Provision and home-to-school transport.

On its own, that bulletin reads positively.

But transformation does not happen in isolation. It happens in context.

And the context in Sandwell includes inspection findings, Ombudsman rulings, transport controversy, backlog recovery and financial strain.

This blog brings it all together — fairly, factually and without exaggeration.

1️⃣ The Inspection Baseline: Inconsistency Identified

In July 2023, Ofsted and CQC inspected Sandwell’s local area SEND arrangements.

Their finding was not collapse — but inconsistency.

Children and young people experienced variable outcomes depending on which part of the system they encountered.

That matters.

“Inconsistent” in inspection language means:

• Practice varies across teams and partners
• Some families receive timely support
• Others face delay or confusion

An Inclusion (SEND & AP) Plan 2023–2026 followed. Governance structures were strengthened.

But inspection findings don’t disappear overnight.

They define the starting point for reform.

2️⃣ EHCP Growth and System Strain

Sandwell, like most councils, has seen rapid growth in Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs).

More plans mean:

• More assessments
• More annual reviews
• More transport routes
• More placement pressure
• More High Needs spend

Growth alone is not failure.

But growth without sufficient capacity produces delay.

And delay is where legal risk begins.

3️⃣ The Ombudsman: Systemic Delay Confirmed

In 2025, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman found Sandwell had delayed a significant number of annual reviews across 2024 and 2025.

This was described as systemic.

Annual reviews are not administrative paperwork — they are statutory safeguards that ensure provision remains appropriate.

When reviews are delayed:

• Children remain in outdated provision
• Parents cannot properly exercise appeal rights
• Legal compliance is compromised

What improved?

• Backlog figures were reduced.
• Recovery plans were implemented.
• Monitoring arrangements strengthened.

That is positive.

But systemic delay creates a credibility scar.

Once backlogs have reached four figures, the public will reasonably ask whether structural weakness remains.

4️⃣ SEND Transport: Governance, Controversy and Correction

Transport has been the most publicly visible pressure point.

The 2021 Taxi Contract Controversy

Media reporting highlighted concerns about SEND taxi contracts worth around £20 million, awarded through a restricted tender process to a small number of firms.

Questions were raised about:

• Procurement transparency
• Competition levels
• Governance oversight

It escalated politically.

There has been no proven finding of wrongdoing.

But reputational damage was real.

What changed?

Since then:

• The procurement framework was restructured.
• The earlier Dynamic Purchasing System was closed.
• A Flexible Purchasing System was introduced.
• Governance oversight appears stronger.

Those are meaningful corrective steps.

5️⃣ Ombudsman Fault in Transport Decision-Making

In 2024, the Ombudsman upheld a complaint about transport eligibility decisions.

The council was required to:

• Clarify policy interpretation
• Train staff
• Improve lawful decision recording

That indicates previous inconsistency in applying “nearest suitable school” rules.

Policy correction matters.

But repeated Ombudsman involvement reinforces scepticism.

6️⃣ The 2022 Communication Episode

In 2022, the council apologised after parents felt warned that raising concerns publicly could risk transport provision.

Even if unintended, that episode revealed cultural fragility.

SEND systems rely on trust.

Trust cannot thrive where families fear consequences for speaking out.

7️⃣ The Budget Reality

Sandwell’s High Needs Block reporting shows ongoing overspend pressure.

This is national, not uniquely local.

But financial strain shapes reform.

When the 2026 bulletin references operating within “fixed national funding,” it confirms that cost control is part of the reform environment.

That creates a red flag risk:

If reform is perceived as cost-led rather than child-led, confidence declines.

🚩 The Red Flags That Still Exist

Even acknowledging improvement, several risk areas remain active:

1. Structural Delay Risk

Backlogs were reduced — but demand continues to grow.

2. Transport Sensitivity

Past controversy + safeguarding risk + cost pressure = permanent high-risk area.

3. Policy Consistency

Ombudsman findings show lawful decision-making must be demonstrably consistent.

4. Financial Constraint

High Needs pressure can subtly shift behaviour in eligibility and placement decisions.

5. Transparency Gap

Narrative around transformation is strong.
Published performance metrics are limited.

What Has Been Learned?

To be balanced:

Sandwell has:

• Accepted inspection findings.
• Implemented a formal Inclusion Plan.
• Reduced review backlogs.
• Revised procurement frameworks.
• Responded to Ombudsman decisions.
• Engaged external specialists for system redesign.

There is no evidence of current systemic collapse.

There is no government intervention.

There is no finding of widespread safeguarding failure.

The system is reforming — not imploding.

The Real Test Now

Transformation programmes are easy to announce.

They are harder to evidence.

Sandwell’s SEND system now faces a simple credibility test:

Publish the data.

• EHCP timeliness trends
• Annual review backlog trajectory
• Tribunal volumes
• Transport performance metrics
• Budget forecast and mitigation

Demonstrate safeguarding assurance.

Particularly in transport.

Show that reform improves outcomes.

Not just processes.

Final Thought

Sandwell SEND’s recent history includes:

• Inspection-identified inconsistency
• Ombudsman-confirmed systemic delay
• High-profile transport controversy
• Financial strain

It also includes:

• Governance correction
• Policy revision
• Backlog reduction
• Structured transformation planning

This is not a borough in denial.

But nor is it one that can rely on messaging alone.

Trust will return when red flags turn green.

And that requires evidence — not optimism.

#Sandwell #SEND #SandwellCouncil #SENDTransformation #SENDTransport #Accountability #EducationPolicy #LocalGovernment #ParentVoice #SENDGovernance