Guides
What Is the Graduated Response?
Assess, plan, do, review, explained step by step, with the mistakes that most commonly break it.
What it actually is
A continuous cycle, not a one-off decision
The graduated response is the core mechanism the SEND Code of Practice describes for identifying and supporting need: a continuous, repeating cycle rather than a one-off decision. It's often summarised as four words, assess, plan, do, review, and the cycle is meant to repeat for as long as a pupil needs support, escalating or adjusting provision based on what each review actually shows.
The word "graduated" matters specifically. Support is meant to increase in proportion to need, moving from universal classroom strategies through targeted support and, where genuinely necessary, to a formal EHCP, rather than jumping straight to the most intensive option available regardless of whether it's actually warranted.
The four stages
Assess, plan, do, review
Assess. A clear analysis of a pupil's needs, drawing on the teacher's own assessment, the pupil's progress and development, and the views of the pupil and their parents. This stage fails most often when it's rushed, based on impression rather than genuine evidence.
Plan. Once a need is identified, the school agrees the outcomes being worked toward, the support to be put in place, and the expected impact, with a clear review date attached from the outset, not decided retrospectively.
Do. The support is actually delivered, ideally with the class or subject teacher retaining responsibility for the pupil's progress even where a TA or specialist delivers the intervention itself, rather than the responsibility quietly transferring away from the teacher entirely.
Review. The impact of the support is evaluated against the agreed outcomes, genuinely, not as a formality. This is where the cycle either continues, with adjustments if something isn't working, or concludes, if the outcome has genuinely been met.
Where it breaks
The two most common failure modes
The graduated response fails less often because of any single stage being skipped entirely, and more often because the cycle stops repeating. A plan gets written once, reviewed loosely at the end of the year, and treated as static in between, rather than genuinely cycling through assess-plan-do-review multiple times as circumstances change.
The other common failure is a review that isn't really a review, dates moved forward, targets marked as "ongoing" without genuine evidence either way, rather than an honest assessment of whether the support actually worked.
Build a graduated response that actually cycles
OMNIA drafts. You decide.
Try the Graduated Response Builder →Common questions
Frequently asked
Is the graduated response only for pupils with an EHCP?
No, it applies to every pupil identified as having SEN, whether at SEN Support or with an EHCP. It's the underlying process, not something reserved for the most complex cases.
How often should the cycle repeat?
There's no single fixed national interval, but a genuinely graduated response repeats regularly enough that support can be adjusted before a pupil has fallen significantly further behind, not just at a single annual checkpoint.
Who's responsible for running the graduated response?
The class or subject teacher holds day-to-day responsibility for a pupil's progress, with the SENCO providing expertise, oversight, and support in coordinating the wider process, not taking over responsibility from the teacher entirely.