Guides
IEP vs SEN Support Plan
"IEP" is technically outdated terminology in England, but still used everywhere. Here's the real history, why the term persists, and why it matters less than what the document actually contains.
Terminology history
Where the term came from, and where it went
Individual Education Plans, IEPs, were the standard named document under the SEND Code of Practice's earlier 2001 version. When the Code was substantially revised in 2014, IEPs weren't replaced with a single new named document, they were replaced with a broader requirement: schools must have a clear, individual record of a pupil's needs, targets, and provision, but the 2014 Code deliberately doesn't mandate a specific format or name for it.
In practice, this means "IEP" simply stopped being the official term in England, without a single, universally adopted replacement ever being mandated. Schools now use ILP, DLP, SEN Support Plan, Pupil Passport, or simply "the plan," entirely by local choice.
Why the term persists
Three reasons "IEP" still shows up everywhere
Habit. Anyone trained before 2014, or trained by someone who was, often defaults to the term they learned first, regardless of what's technically current.
International use. Outside England, "IEP" remains the standard, often statutory, term in many other systems, the US uses it as a legally defined document under IDEA, and many British-curriculum international schools use it as their working name regardless of what England's own Code of Practice currently calls for.
Search habit. People searching for help with this document type "IEP" far more often than any of the newer, more fragmented terminology, simply because it's the term that stuck culturally even after the official language moved on.
What actually matters
Substance over label
The 2014 Code of Practice deliberately doesn't prescribe a format, which means arguing about whether to call something an IEP, an ILP, or a SEN Support Plan is largely a distraction from the actual substance that matters:
- A specific, evidenced need, not just a category label.
- A measurable target, with a real method of assessment attached.
- Named, costed provision, not a vague description of "additional support."
- A genuine review point that creates accountability.
A document called an IEP that has all four of these is doing its job. A document called an SEN Support Plan that lacks them isn't, regardless of which name is technically more current.
Draft plans that pass the four-point test
OMNIA drafts. You decide.
Try the Student Profile Generator →Common questions
Frequently asked
Should I stop using the term IEP?
Not urgently, and not if your school or your staff already understand it clearly. What matters more than the label is whether the document itself does the job described above. If you're building new templates from scratch, "SEN Support Plan" or a name specific to your own context is marginally more aligned with current England terminology, but this isn't a compliance issue either way.
Is an IEP a legal requirement?
Not by that specific name. What's required is that a pupil receiving SEN Support has clear, individual provision recorded and reviewed, in whatever format a school chooses to call it.
Do other UK nations use the same terminology?
No. Scotland's equivalent sits within its Additional Support for Learning framework, Wales uses Individual Development Plans under its own distinct legal system (ALN reform), and Northern Ireland has its own separate terminology again. "IEP" as a term crosses all of these informally, even though none of them currently mandate it by that name.