SEN Units, Resource Provisions and Inclusion Bases 

22 April 2026

The parents of Disabled children will be familiar with Special Educational Needs Units (“SEN Units”) and Specialist Resource Provision (“SRP”) – at the very least they will have heard of them. This article will explore what they are, whether they are compatible with the principle of Inclusive Education and the Equality Act 2010, before briefly considering inclusion bases.

What are SEN Units and SRPs?

There is, as far as we can tell, no statutory definition of either the term ‘SEN Unit’ or ‘SRP’. Searches of the key Acts of Parliament that govern the regulation of education for those with special educational needs draws a blank. Neither the Children and Families Act 2014, the Education Act 1996, nor the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 provide a definition, despite those statutory schemes defining: ‘Academy’, ‘mainstream school’, ‘maintained school’, ‘middle school’, ‘nursery school’, ‘primary education’, ‘primary school’, ‘secondary education’, ‘special school’, ‘special educational needs’ and, even, simply – ‘school’.

Neither is any clear definition found in case law emanating from the Upper Tribunal, which has spent many hours considering whether particular institutions could meet the definition of a ‘school’.

That there is no statutory definition is important. On one view, had Parliament intended SEN Units and SRPs to be widely used to educate Disabled children, it would have given them a clear legal basis for existence, and sought to regulate their use in law.

The most comprehensive definition that we could find was in an old Department for Education guidance document on the completion of the school census from May 2018 which provided the following definitions:

“SEN Units are special provisions within a mainstream school where the children with SEN are taught mainly within separate classes. Units are designated by the local authority specifically or making SEN provision…cater for a specific type or types of SEN, are usually for pupils with…an education, health and care plan…

Resources provisions are where places are reserved at a mainstream school for pupils with a specific type of SEN, taught mainly within mainstream classes, but requiring a base and some specialist facilities around the school”

Those definitions do appear to correlate to what happens in practise with SRPs being used to enhance the provision in mainstream school, catering for the needs of Disabled children who are perceived as academically able, with teaching happening in mainstream classes with support provided by the SRP (often in the form of additional staffing.) SEN Units then, are supporting students whose impairment considered as difficult for them to access a mainstream curriculum, with the majority of teaching taking place in the unit.

Is this practice compatible with the principle of Inclusive Education?

The practical answer to this question is no, but the question of compatibility with United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (“UNCRPD”) is slightly more nuanced.

The clear similarity between both SEN Units and SRPs is segregation. Segregation is actively promoted in the case of SEN Units which, by their very nature, require Disabled children to be educated outside of the mainstream setting for periods of time. SRPs on the other hand, whilst not necessarily segregating from the mainstream classroom, give rise to the risk that Disabled children become segregated in practice, with time being spent engaging with the SRP staff, rather than the mainstream class around them. In either case, the practical impact of the operation of SEN Units and SRPs is segregation which is not compatible with Inclusive Education, or the spirit of inclusivity.

In so far as the specifics of the UNCRPD is concerned, Article 24(2) requires state parties to

“ensure that persons with disabilities are not excluded from the general education system on the basis of disability” and that “persons with disabilities can access an inclusive…education on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live”.

Removing Disabled children from classes with their mainstream peers or, as is the case for children perceived as having particularly challenging needs, requiring them to be educated away from home due to limitations in local schools being able to meet need is, in our view, antithetical to those requirements.

From a legal perspective the question is whether that means that the UK Government is, in maintaining the current education system, in breach of international law? The strict answer is no. This is not because the Government is a bastion of inclusive practice and has established a system in which inclusion is at its heart but, rather, because of a legal technicality in how it chose to implement the UNCRPD. The Government could have ratified the UNCRPD without restrictions. Had it done so it may1 have required the Government to adopt a fundamentally different model of education. Instead, the Government actively chose to apply two restrictions on the implementation of the UNCRPD. One of those restrictions allows the Government to operate a split education system incorporating education in mainstream and special schools2. In ALLFIE’s view, in choosing to adopt the UNCRPD with restrictions has allowed the Government to operate an education system that is anything but inclusive, with the protection of its own restrictions ensuring that its practices cannot be legally challenged, at least at an international level.

Equality

The UNCRPD is an international legal framework. It was implemented, in part, through the Equality Act 2010 (“the EA 2010”).

Section 149 of the EA 2010 contains the public sector equality duty (“PSED”) In broad summary and with specific reference to the protected characteristic of disability, the PSED requires public authorities, when exercising their functions, to have due regard to eliminating conduct prohibited under the EA 2010, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between Disabled and non- Disabled individuals.

ALLFIE does not consider that the current model of education is compatible with the Government’s obligations under the PSED. The current system does not advance equality of opportunity for Disabled pupils. We regularly hear stories of Disabled pupils being taught by staff in SEN Units or SRP staff who are not qualified teachers (unlike mainstream peers who are taught by qualified teaching staff) and who do not have the same access to resources as non-Disabled peers when removed from the mainstream classroom. We question how that advances equality of opportunity. Equally, it appears to be accepted that those Disabled children who are perceived as less academically able should not be required to sit the same level of public examination as their non-Disabled peers, thereby limiting their opportunities as they advance into adulthood.

Equally, section 149 of the EA 2010 specifies that fostering good relations includes tackling prejudice and promoting understanding. One cannot understand what one does not know. Segregating Disabled children removes them from the sight of their non-Disabled peers and in so doing removes them from their minds, restricting their ability to get to understand them and allowing prejudice to grow.

The current education system therefore, even if on a technicality is lawful under international law, could be considered to be operating counter to the terms (or at the very least the spirit) of the principles of the EA 2010.

“Inclusion bases”

Above we have addressed the education system as it currently stands. We fear that the future is equally as bleak. At the time of writing the Department for Education has just announced its 10-year estate strategy which will place an expectation on secondary schools to have “inclusion bases” which will be “dedicated spaces” where “pupils can access targeted support that bridges the gap between mainstream and specialist provision”. It is part of the Government’s push for inclusion. Whilst it is not yet clear how this aim will be realised (the funding model has not yet been published) further guidance is expected in the Spring. The question remains will inclusion bases actually foster inclusion, or will they simply give the appearance of inclusion? Placing Disabled children in a mainstream school but hidden away in an “inclusion base” is not inclusion. It continues the segregation practices that currently occur through the use of SEN Units. Perhaps, although we are sceptical, the forthcoming White Paper will reveal all.