SALT Report Explained: Understanding UK Speech and Language Therapy Assessment Results

Your child's SALT report arrived — possibly from the NHS, possibly from a private therapist — and it's a wall of standardized scores, percentile ranks, clinical observations, and recommendations in language that reads like it was written for another speech and language therapist, not for you.

Understanding this report isn't optional if you're preparing for an EHCP assessment, an annual review, or a tribunal. The scores in it directly determine what your child's provision looks like in Section F — how many hours, what type of therapy, delivered by whom. Vague understanding leads to vague provision. Here's what to look for.

What SALT Stands For and Who Writes the Report

SALT stands for Speech and Language Therapist (or Speech and Language Therapy, depending on context). In the UK, qualified SALTs are registered with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) and typically hold a degree in speech and language therapy.

A SALT assessment may come through:

• NHS provision: Your child was referred by the school SENCO, GP, or health visitor. Multi-year NHS waiting lists are reported.
• Private assessment: You paid for an independent SALT assessment, typically to build an EHCP application or to challenge an NHS report you disagree with.
• School-commissioned: Some schools commission a SALT to assess specific children, though this is less common than NHS pathways.

The source of a report does not by itself determine how a local authority or Tribunal will weigh it. A registered SALT's assessment is professional evidence; its methods, findings, functional impact, and recommendations should be considered alongside other relevant evidence.

Reading the Scores

UK SALT reports may use some of the same standardized tools as US evaluations (such as CELF-5 and PPVT-5), alongside UK-specific tests such as BPVS-3, ACE, and RAPT. Standard-score scales are familiar, but test editions and norm groups matter:

Standard scores have a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. A score of 85 falls at -1.0 SD (16th percentile). A score of 70 falls at -2.0 SD (2nd percentile). Most NHS services use the 5th percentile (standard score around 75, roughly -1.67 SD) as the threshold for "significantly below" expectations.

Scaled scores (used for individual subtests on the CELF-5) have a mean of 10 and standard deviation of 3. Average range is 8-12. A scaled score of 7 is -1.0 SD; a scaled score of 5 is roughly -1.67 SD.

Percentile ranks show where your child falls compared to same-age peers. The 50th percentile means average. The 5th percentile means 95% of same-age children scored higher.

Age equivalents sometimes appear in UK reports ("functioning at the language level of a 4-year-old"). These are clinically unreliable — ASHA and test developers caution against using them for diagnostic decisions. They exaggerate some differences and flatten others. If the report relies heavily on age equivalents rather than standard scores, that's a limitation to note.

What to Look For in Each Section

Background and referral: Confirms the clinical context — who referred the child, developmental history, educational concerns. Check this section for accuracy. If it contains errors about your child's history, correct them in writing.

Assessment tools used: The report should name every test administered and its edition. Common UK batteries include the CELF-5, BPVS-3 (British Picture Vocabulary Scale), ACE (Assessment of Comprehension and Expression), RAPT (Renfrew Action Picture Test), and narrative assessments. If the evaluation used only a single standardized test, it may not be comprehensive enough for an EHCP application.

Scores and analysis: This is where the clinical findings live. Look for:

• Whether composite scores and individual subtest scores are both reported (a composite alone can mask severe individual deficits)
• Whether a language sample was analysed alongside standardized testing
• Whether the therapist interpreted the scores in context — a standard score of 82 with functional classroom struggles tells a different story than a score of 82 in a child managing well

Recommendations: This section drives the EHCP. It should specify the type, frequency, duration, and delivery model of therapy. "Access to SALT support" is not a recommendation — it's a placeholder. Compare this section to the legally compliant wording standards from SEND Tribunal case law.

Connecting the Report to Your EHCP

If you're using the SALT report for an EHCP application or annual review, the scores and recommendations map directly to two sections:

Section B (Special Educational Needs): The report's diagnostic findings go here — what the assessment identified, which areas of speech, language, and communication are affected, and how they impact learning.

Section F (Special Educational Provision): The report's recommendations go here — and they must be specific and quantified. Case law (including L v. Clarke and Somerset County Council) has established that vague EHCP wording in Section F is not legally compliant.

Legally compliant Section F language looks like: "1 hour per week of direct 1:1 Speech and Language Therapy delivered by a qualified Speech and Language Therapist, plus 20 minutes daily of language intervention delivered by a trained Teaching Assistant under the direct supervision of the SLT."

Non-compliant language looks like: "Access to speech therapy input throughout the school term" or "SALT support as needed."

If your child's EHCP contains vague provision language, the SALT report's specific recommendations are your evidence base for requesting amendments — and for a Tribunal appeal if the local authority refuses.

When You Disagree With the Report

If the NHS SALT assessment says your child doesn't meet the threshold for services but you see daily struggles at home and school, you have options:

• Request that the NHS therapist explain the specific cutoff used and how your child's functional difficulties were weighted alongside the scores
• Obtain a private SALT assessment — a second opinion with a different clinician using a comprehensive battery can produce different findings, especially if the NHS assessment was brief or relied on a limited test set
• Ask the school SENCO to compile classroom evidence (teacher observations, work samples, incident logs) that documents the functional impact the scores may not capture

A SALT report is one piece of the evidence. Teacher observations, educational psychology assessments, and parental evidence form the rest. A comprehensive picture is always stronger for an EHCP application than any single report.

The Speech-Language Evaluation Decoder explains every commonly used assessment tool, breaks down the scoring system, and includes UK-specific guidance for connecting SALT findings to EHCP Section B and Section F requirements. It covers what legally compliant provision looks like and what to challenge if your child's EHCP uses vague language.