SEN Appeal Working Document (SEND23): How to Draft It

At a glance

• What it is: an editable Word copy of the EHC plan, marked up by parents and the local authority (LA) to show agreed changes, proposed amendments and outstanding disagreement, ahead of a SEND Tribunal appeal about the contents of the plan (Sections B, F and/or I, appealed under section 51 of the Children and Families Act 2014).
• Who starts it: usually the LA, when it files its response to the appeal on Form SEND35 — it should send the first version (WDv1) to parents at the same time.
• The formatting key: normal type = original plan wording; underlined = agreed changes; bold = parents' proposed amendments; bold strikethrough = parents' proposed deletions; italic = LA's proposed amendments; italic strikethrough = LA's proposed deletions.
• Page limit: 25 pages of A4, in force for any final hearing listed to take place after 15 July 2025 under Practice Direction No. 1 of 2025. Going over it needs a Request for Change (Form SEND7) explaining why.
• Filing deadline: the final agreed working document should reach the Tribunal, as part of the tribunal bundle, at least 10 working days before the hearing.
• What decides the hearing agenda: the Case Review Form, not the working document itself — the Tribunal has said it will not usually deal with an issue that isn't flagged on one or both documents.
• Cost: appealing to the First-tier Tribunal (SEND) is free. There is no tribunal fee.

What the working document is, and where it fits in the appeal

A working document is a copy of the final EHC plan on which parents (or the young person) and the local authority mark up the changes they want, the changes they agree, and the wording that remains in dispute for the Tribunal to decide. It applies to appeals against the contents of the plan — the child's or young person's special educational needs in Section B, the special educational provision in Section F, and the school or placement type in Section I — brought under section 51 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

It is not itself a legal form and it does not create legally binding provision. Its purpose is to narrow the issues before the hearing so the Tribunal panel can see, at a glance, exactly what is agreed and what still needs deciding. Under the Tribunal's Practice Direction No. 1 of 2025, the final working document is appended to the Tribunal's eventual decision, to record the amendments the parties reached agreement on.

Who prepares it, and the WDv1 → WDv2 → final sequence

Because the LA holds the EHC plan electronically, it is expected to prepare the first draft (often labelled WDv1) once it has seen the notice of appeal, and to send it to parents alongside its formal response to the appeal (Form SEND35). Parents or their representative then review it and mark up the amendments they are seeking, sending a new version (WDv2) back to the LA. The LA responds with its own proposed changes or counter-proposals, and the document continues to pass back and forth — narrowing the areas of disagreement — until a final consolidated version is ready to file.

GOV.UK's guidance for local authorities recommends starting this process as early as possible, and it usually makes practical sense to wait until both sides have filed their evidence before finalising amendments, since the wording you propose should be grounded in that evidence.

The official formatting key

The Tribunal's SEND23 guidance sets out a standard key so that anyone reading the document — including a judge or panel member seeing it for the first time — can immediately tell who proposed what:

| Format | Meaning | |---|---| | Normal type | Original EHC plan wording | | Underlined type / underlined strikethrough | Amendments or deletions agreed by both parties | | Bold type | Parents' proposed amendments | | Bold strikethrough | Parents' proposed deletions | | Italic type | LA's proposed amendments | | Italic strikethrough | LA's proposed deletions |

Keep the key itself at the top of the document. Consistency matters more than which exact colour or style is chosen, but this convention is what the Tribunal expects. If specific wording is drawn from evidence in the tribunal bundle, reference the page number rather than using footnotes for that purpose.

If the key itself is a barrier — for example because the mix of underlining, bold and italics is hard to follow if you are dyslexic — tell the LA. The Tribunal has confirmed it is willing to accept a detailed list of issues between the parties instead of a formatted working document, provided it clearly sets out every change sought and which of the LA's proposals are disputed.

The 25-page limit (in force since 15 July 2025)

Since Practice Direction No. 1 of 2025 on the preparation of bundles took effect — it applies to any SEND or Disability Discrimination final hearing listed to take place after 15 July 2025 — the working document forms Part Seven of the Tribunal bundle and must not exceed 25 pages of A4. The parties must also each provide a list of their unagreed additions and deletions, cross-referenced to the documentary evidence relied on.

If your appeal genuinely needs a longer document — a multi-section extended appeal (Sections B, C, D, F, G and H together), or a case where a large number of changes have been worked through using the formatting key — you must apply for permission using Form SEND7 (Request for Change) and explain why the extra pages are necessary. Simply filing an over-length document without explanation risks it being rejected.

What belongs in Sections B, F and I

• Section B (special educational needs): every need that the child or young person actually has, described specifically enough that a reader can see what it is without needing other documents.
• Section F (special educational provision): provision that is specific and quantified — who delivers it, how often, for how long, in what setting, and towards what outcome. Wording such as "access to" or "opportunities for" support is generally discouraged because it cannot be checked or enforced. Every need identified in Section B should have corresponding provision in Section F that addresses it.
• Section I (placement): the school, college or type of setting, where that is what is under appeal.

If you are arguing for a particular type of placement or an extended-day curriculum, the wording in Section F needs to demonstrate why that level of support is required — the placement argument is won or lost largely on how well Section F is drafted.

A practical drafting habit: reference your evidence

When you propose new wording — for example, "one hour per week of 1:1 speech and language therapy delivered by a qualified SLT" — reference the specific report and page number it comes from. This shows the LA and the Tribunal that the change is evidence-based rather than aspirational, and it is far more persuasive than an unsupported request. Avoid pasting large chunks of professional reports directly into the plan; summarise the relevant recommendation and cite the source instead. This also helps keep the document inside the 25-page limit.

Deadlines to diarise

| Stage | What happens | |---|---| | LA's response to appeal (Form SEND35) | Filed within 6 weeks of the appeal being registered; LA should send WDv1 with it | | Evidence deadline | Set by the Tribunal's case management directions; usually before the working document is finalised | | Case Review Form | Sets out the issues still requiring a decision; usually due around the same time as the working document | | Final working document | Must reach the Tribunal — as part of the electronic tribunal bundle — at least 10 working days before the hearing | | Late changes | If wording changes after that deadline, the new version must be emailed to the Tribunal and the other party, plus paper copies brought to the hearing if directed |

Missing the tribunal bundle deadline carries real consequences: under the current Practice Direction, a failure to meet it can lead to the LA being automatically barred from further participation in the proceedings, or the case being struck out, at the Tribunal's discretion.

What happens if you cannot agree

Whatever remains genuinely disputed by the deadline stays in the document, formatted so the panel can see exactly what each side is proposing. At the hearing, the judge and specialist panel members hear evidence and argument on those disputed points and then decide. Regulation 44 of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 sets out how quickly the LA must act on the Tribunal's order — for example, five weeks to issue an amended plan where the order requires a change to the provision specified in Section F, or two weeks to issue an amended plan where only the named school or placement type changes.

Importantly, the Tribunal has said it will focus on the Case Review Form as the agenda for the hearing, not go through the working document line by line — so make sure every disputed issue is flagged clearly on both documents, not just one.

Worked example: narrowing a Section F dispute

A parent's proposed working document might show: bold "one hour per week of 1:1 speech and language therapy, delivered by a qualified SLT (see SLT report, p.4)" against the LA's italic counter-proposal of "regular access to speech and language therapy input." After two rounds of exchange, the LA agrees to specify "30 minutes per week of 1:1 SLT input, delivered or closely supervised by a qualified SLT" — shown as underlined agreed text in the final version. The frequency itself remains disputed and stays formatted to show each side's position, so the Tribunal can decide that single point at the hearing rather than the whole of Section F.

Practical steps

1. Request the Word version from the local authority as soon as your appeal is registered, and expect it alongside the LA's Form SEND35 response.
2. Wait until evidence is filed before finalising your proposed amendments, so the wording reflects what the reports actually say.
3. Draft Section B and F together, making sure every identified need has corresponding, quantified provision.
4. Apply the formatting key consistently, and keep the key itself visible at the top of the document.
5. Keep it inside 25 pages. If you genuinely need more, apply on Form SEND7 before you file, explaining why.
6. Cross-reference your evidence — cite the report and page number behind each proposed change, rather than copying report text wholesale.
7. Mirror every disputed point on the Case Review Form as well as in the working document, and file both by the deadline your registration letter sets — usually at least 10 working days before the hearing.

This guide provides general information about the SEND Tribunal working document process in England and Wales. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for advice tailored to your specific circumstances. The law and Tribunal practice described were accurate as at August 2026 and are subject to change — always check GOV.UK and judiciary.uk for the current position.

Last reviewed: August 2026 by a non-practising solicitor · Next review due: August 2027 or on legislative change.