IDP Quality Checklist for Wales: How to Tell a Good IDP from a Bad One

Your child's school has finally handed you an Individual Development Plan. You've been waiting weeks for it. You read through it once, and something feels off — but you can't put your finger on what.

This is one of the most common experiences Welsh parents describe after receiving a first IDP draft. The document looks official. It has sections, headings, and your child's name. But if it promises things like "access to support when needed" or "regular opportunities for sensory breaks," it may be almost worthless as a legal instrument.

Here is how to audit it properly.

What "Specified and Quantified" Actually Means

The Additional Learning Needs Code for Wales 2021 is explicit on this point. The Additional Learning Provision (ALP) written into Section 2B of your child's IDP must be described in a way that is specific and quantified. That means the plan must state:

• What the provision is (e.g., 1:1 specialist teaching assistant support)
• How much of it (e.g., 27.5 hours per week)
• How often it happens (e.g., daily, three times per week)
• Who delivers it (e.g., a trained TA, a speech and language therapist)
• In which language if Welsh-medium ALP is required

This requirement exists because vague language is unenforceable. If an IDP says "the pupil will receive support from a TA as required," the school cannot be held accountable for failing to deliver it — because "as required" is a moving target that shifts based on budget pressure and staffing levels. Specified and quantified language removes that ambiguity. It creates a legally binding commitment.

The IDP Quality Checklist: Run Your Child's Plan Through This

Go to Section 2A and 2B of the IDP and apply these tests:

Section 2A — Description of ALN

• [ ] Does it name the specific learning difficulty or disability acting as a barrier (e.g., "expressive language delay as identified in the 2025 SALT assessment" — not "the child has communication difficulties")?
• [ ] Does it distinguish clearly between the child's ALN and what the school's ordinary classroom teaching already covers?
• [ ] Does it avoid generic descriptors like "complex needs" without explaining what those needs are?

Section 2B — Additional Learning Provision

• [ ] Is every provision stated as a measurable commitment (hours per week, frequency per day) — not "regular," "frequent," or "when needed"?
• [ ] Does it name who delivers each provision — not just "a member of staff" or "appropriate support"?
• [ ] Does it state whether Welsh-medium delivery is required for any part of the ALP?
• [ ] Are the outcomes linked to specific goals that can be reviewed at the annual review — not vague targets like "improve communication skills"?

Section 2C — Health-Related ALP

• [ ] If a Local Health Board has agreed to provide therapy (e.g., speech and language therapy, occupational therapy), is it described with the same specificity — frequency, duration, named service?
• [ ] Does it include start and review dates for health provision?

Overall Structure

• [ ] Do the mandatory headings from Annex A of the ALN Code appear in the correct order?
• [ ] Is the IDP signed off by the responsible body (school governing body, or the local authority if LA-maintained)?

Good IDP vs. Bad IDP: Real Examples

The difference between a legally enforceable IDP and a document designed to protect the school's budget often comes down to a single phrase.

The left column represents what ALNCos routinely write when protecting a delegated ALN budget. Audit Wales found that annual spending on ALN support in Wales is approaching £1 billion — yet budget pressure at school level means specific commitments are resisted at every draft.

How to Use This Audit Before Responding to the School

When you receive a draft IDP for review — schools are required to share it with you before finalising — you have a legal window to challenge it. Do not sign it if the provisions are vague.

Write formally to the ALNCo referencing Section 2B of the ALN Code 2021. Point out specifically which provisions fail the "specified and quantified" standard and request that they be rewritten with exact hours, frequency, and named deliverers before the plan is finalised.

If the school finalises an IDP with vague language anyway, you have the right to request the Local Authority reconsider and, if necessary, appeal to the Education Tribunal for Wales (ETW). The Upper Tribunal's ruling in Cardiff Council v X & Anor makes clear that tribunals will heavily scrutinise the evidence base used to justify — or reduce — specific ALP hours.

Why Vague Language Appears in the First Place

Schools are not drafting weak IDPs out of malice in most cases. The ALNCo carries enormous legal responsibility for drafting, maintaining, and reviewing IDPs while managing a full school caseload. ALN budgets are constrained — council expenditure on ALN increased by 34% in real terms between 2018-19 and 2025-26, but the money does not always reach individual schools proportionately.

The result is that ALNCos sometimes write the IDP they can deliver rather than the IDP the child needs. The legal and practical pressure falls on parents to push back.

After the Audit: What Next?

If your child's IDP fails three or more of the checklist items above, you are not dealing with a minor administrative issue. You are dealing with a document that provides no real legal protection.

The Wales IDP & ALN Blueprint includes a full side-by-side IDP translation matrix, template letters for challenging vague provision language, and a step-by-step guide to forcing a school to rewrite Section 2B to meet the ALN Code standard — without needing to hire a consultant at £110 per hour.

Run the checklist tonight. If the IDP fails it, you have the tools to demand it be rewritten before it is made final.

See more United Kingdom guides →