Guides · EHCP outcomes
EHCP outcomes examples: Section E, across all four areas of need
Section E of an EHCP is where the plan lives or dies at annual review. Worked examples across the four broad areas of need, with the phrasing that gets rejected, the phrasing that doesn't, and why the difference matters.
The rule
What counts as an EHCP outcome under the SEND Code of Practice
The SEND Code of Practice defines an outcome as “the benefit or difference made to an individual as a result of an intervention” — not the intervention itself. An outcome describes what the child will be able to do, be, or experience by a specified point in time. It is not a target, not a strategy, and not a provision.
A useful test: if you can hand the outcome to the pupil's next class teacher two years from now, and they can look at the pupil and honestly answer yes or no to whether it has been achieved, it's an outcome. If they'd need to hunt through provision logs to answer, it's a target dressed up as one.
Communication and interaction
Communication and interaction outcomes — SLCN and autism examples
Too vague
“Amara will improve her communication skills.”
Legally useful
“By the end of Year 6, Amara will initiate and sustain a two-turn conversation with a familiar adult about a topic of her choice, in 8 out of 10 opportunities across a fortnight, without adult prompting.”
Why: Names the skill (initiating and sustaining), the context (familiar adult, chosen topic), the measure (8/10 over a fortnight), and the endpoint (end of Year 6). A next teacher could verify it.
Too vague
“Kai will manage transitions better.”
Legally useful
“By July 2027, Kai will move between three named classroom activities within a lesson using his visual timetable, without requiring 1:1 adult scripting, on at least 4 days of a school week.”
Why: Ties the outcome to a specific support (visual timetable), specifies what independence looks like (no 1:1 scripting), and gives a measurable frequency.
Cognition and learning
Cognition and learning outcomes — literacy, numeracy, working memory
Too vague
“Noor will make good progress in reading.”
Legally useful
“By the end of Key Stage 2, Noor will read aloud a Year-4-appropriate text with 95% accuracy and retell the main events in sequence, assessed termly using a running record.”
Why: 'Good progress' is unverifiable. This names the age-band of the text, the accuracy threshold, and the assessment method — anyone can pick up a running record and confirm.
Too vague
“Jamal will improve his working memory.”
Legally useful
“By July 2026, Jamal will follow a three-step verbal instruction in a whole-class setting on 4 out of 5 occasions, without needing the instruction repeated, evidenced by class-teacher observation across two consecutive weeks.”
Why: Working memory itself isn't observable; a three-step instruction is. The outcome describes the functional behaviour that flows from the underlying skill, which is what the pupil actually needs.
Social, emotional and mental health
Social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) outcome examples
Too vague
“Priya will regulate her emotions.”
Legally useful
“By the end of Year 8, Priya will use one of her agreed regulation strategies (movement break, sensory box, or scripted phrase) to leave a lesson calmly, before an incident escalates, on at least 3 of 5 identified triggers per fortnight.”
Why: SEMH outcomes fail most often because they read as behaviour targets ('will not shout out'). This one describes the pupil <em>doing</em> something — using a strategy — which is the actual goal of intervention.
Too vague
“Leo will develop positive peer relationships.”
Legally useful
“By July 2027, Leo will voluntarily join a structured social group at break time on at least 2 days per school week for a full half-term, sustaining participation for at least 10 minutes.”
Why: Naming the frequency, duration, and setting turns 'positive peer relationships' from an aspiration into something a lunchtime supervisor could verify.
Sensory and physical
Sensory and physical outcome examples — physical, hearing, vision
Too vague
“Ravi will access the curriculum independently.”
Legally useful
“By the end of Year 9, Ravi will access all written material in his preferred format (large print, digital, or audio) and complete written work using assistive technology on his own device, without requiring an adult to set it up, in 100% of lessons.”
Why: 'Access the curriculum' is the standard vague EHCP phrase. This specifies the format, the assistive technology, the independence, and the coverage.
Common mistakes
EHCP outcome phrasing that gets rejected at review
- Provisions dressed as outcomes. “Will receive weekly speech therapy” is a provision, not an outcome. The outcome is what speech therapy achieves.
- Aspirations dressed as outcomes. “Will be happy at school” is a Section A aspiration. Section E needs measurable functional change.
- Targets dressed as outcomes. A target lives in a plan or IEP, spans weeks, and is reviewed termly. An outcome spans a Key Stage or an EHCP phase, and is reviewed annually.
- Deficit framing. Outcomes describe what the pupil will do, not what they'll stop doing. “Will not disrupt lessons” fails; “Will remain in the classroom for the full lesson, using an agreed strategy…” passes.
Related reading
Related EHCP guides
- What is an EHCP? A complete guide — the plan structure that outcomes live inside.
- SMART Target Audit — check a live target against the same rigour.
- Provision mapping guide — the provision that turns an outcome from aspiration into evidence.
Draft outcomes from real pupil evidence
OMNIA pulls context from assessments, plans, and pupil voice, then drafts outcomes cited to a named source. You decide what stays.
Try the EHCP Review Agenda Builder →