What Is Provision Mapping? A Complete Guide

What is provision mapping

The definition, and where it sits in the SEND Code of Practice

A provision map is a document that records the additional support in place across a school or a whole cohort, organised so patterns can be seen at a glance rather than reconstructed pupil by pupil. It answers questions an individual plan can't easily answer on its own: which interventions are running, how consistently, for whom, and at what cost.

A provision map isn't a standalone statutory document in itself, but it's how a school evidences the graduated response required by the SEND Code of Practice, the assess-plan-do-review cycle that sits underneath every pupil's support. It's also the document most schools turn to when a Local Authority asks what a top-up funding request is actually paying for, more on that below.

Worth being precise about the distinction from an individual pupil's plan. A plan (DLP, ILP, BSP, or an EHCP's own provision section) describes what one child needs. A provision map describes what a school is actually delivering, across every child receiving that provision, which is the only view that lets a SENCO answer "is this working consistently, or only for some pupils some of the time."

What goes on a provision map

A worked example

A useful provision map is structured by provision first, pupils second, so you can see at a glance how consistently each type of support is actually being delivered, not just who's receiving it. Here's a worked example of what a single row looks like in practice.

The details that separate a genuinely useful row from a box-ticking one: a real outcome measure, not just attendance at the session, and a real cost, staff time costed honestly rather than treated as free because the TA's already employed. Both matter for the next section.

Provision map template

A template you can copy

If you're starting from a blank sheet, these are the columns worth having. One row per provision, not per pupil, with the pupils receiving it named in the final column, so patterns of delivery stay visible.

The two columns most often missing from a template found online are cost and outcome measure. Without them, a provision map records activity but can't evidence either value for money or impact, which are exactly the two questions a funding panel or an inspector will ask.

Costing a provision map

How to cost provision for EHCP top-up funding

In England, SEND funding for a mainstream pupil is generally thought of in three parts. Element 1 is the core per-pupil funding every school receives regardless of need. Element 2 is the school's own notional SEN budget, drawn from its wider funding, which a school is expected to use for the first tranche of additional support, commonly discussed as up to around \u00a36,000 per pupil per year, though this isn't a fixed national figure and varies by local formula. Element 3 is top-up funding, money from the Local Authority's High Needs Block, agreed for a specific pupil once their assessed need genuinely exceeds what the notional budget can reasonably cover.

A costed provision map is the evidence a Local Authority actually wants to see when agreeing or reviewing a top-up request. Not a narrative description of need, a specific, costed account of what's being delivered, how often, by whom, and what it costs, set against what the notional budget already covers. A vague request is easy to query. A request backed by a provision map with real costs and real outcome data is far harder to push back on.

Practical costing habits worth adopting

• Cost staff time at a genuine hourly rate, not zero, "the TA's already on payroll" undercounts the true cost of a provision and weakens a funding case built on it.
• Cost per term as well as per year, since funding panels often want to see the in-year commitment, not just an annual total.
• Separate the cost of universal adjustments (which sit inside Element 1 and 2, and shouldn't be double-counted in a top-up request) from the cost of anything genuinely additional to what every pupil already receives.
• Keep the outcome measure next to the cost on the same row. A funding panel reviewing cost without visible impact data is reviewing half the case.

Where a spreadsheet stops being enough

How software helps

A provision map built once and updated termly is a snapshot, not a live picture. The gap between what's planned and what's actually delivered widens quietly in between updates, and nobody notices until a review meeting reveals limited progress with no clear explanation, or an inspector asks for evidence that's now weeks out of date.

OMNIA's provision map shows what's planned and what's actually delivered, structured by provision as well as by pupil, so a SENCO or school leader can see at a glance which provisions are reliably delivered and which are consistently patchy, without reconstructing the picture by hand under pressure.

Common questions

Frequently asked