Creating Inclusion Strategies that are built, not just written
Every school is expected to publish its Inclusion Strategy by 31 December 2026. To support this process, the government has now provided a model template. But this strategy cannot simply be a document to complete. It needs to be the result of deep understanding: the commonly occurring needs within each setting, the gaps in current provision, what is working well, what is not, where investment is needed and how success will be measured. In other words, it needs to come from deliberate, strategic thinking.
A new era of inclusion
The introduction of the Inclusive Mainstream Fund (IMF), alongside the requirement to publish an Inclusion Strategy, marks a significant shift in policy. Leaders are being asked not only to invest in inclusion, but to demonstrate how that investment strengthens provision and improves outcomes for children and young people.
The move presents a genuine opportunity for positive change – but it also needs careful navigation, particularly when it comes to building the strategy itself.
The risk: completing the template without building the strategy
As with many system-wide changes, there is a risk that attention is drawn towards the most visible and tangible outcome: the published Inclusion Strategy itself. This is understandable, particularly with the December deadline approaching and a government template now available to support schools and trusts through the process.
The template is helpful. It provides a structure for setting out context, barriers, planned activity, funding, co-production and intended impact. But a structure alone cannot do the thinking. Under pressure to respond, schools and trusts may be tempted to focus on completing the document – filling in each section, allocating funding and setting out activity to demonstrate progress – rather than first doing the deeper strategic work needed to make those decisions meaningful.
When that happens, the Inclusion Strategy risks becoming a compliance exercise rather than a lever for improvement. Activity can become fragmented rather than aligned, investment decisions may not be clearly matched to predictable and presenting cohort needs, and plans can prove difficult to translate into day-to-day practice. Most importantly, there is less certainty that the activity described will lead to meaningful change for pupils.
There is already a clear precedent for this. Schools are currently required to publish a SEND Information Report, yet reviews of these documents often find generic language, copied content, limited reference to actual need, little clarity on how funding is used and weak evidence of impact. Too often, they exist as compliance documents rather than tools for improvement.
Without a deliberate shift in approach, there is a risk that Inclusion Strategies follow the same path: different in name, but similar in outcome. The challenge, therefore, is not simply to complete the template well, but to ensure that what is published reflects a strategy that has been carefully built, grounded in context and capable of driving lasting improvement.
The opportunity: from funding to impact
If viewed differently, the Inclusive Mainstream Fund offers much more than a funding stream. It creates space for deeper, more purposeful thinking, and invites leaders to pause and reflect on the fundamentals:
- The needs that most consistently arise across their cohorts
- The barriers pupils face to feeling like they belong and can learn well
- The areas where provision is working and already making a meaningful difference
It also encourages a more structured reflection on inclusion by design. Rather than viewing inclusion as a series of disconnected initiatives, schools and trusts are prompted to consider how effectively inclusive practice is embedded across the organisation as a whole.
From here, leaders are able think carefully about where investment will have the greatest impact – not just in the short term, but in ways that strengthen provision for the foreseeable.
These are not quick or easy questions to answer. But they are the ones that determine whether strategy setting becomes an exercise in compliance or a lever for genuine improvement.
Context must lead the inclusion strategy
As we all know, no two schools or trusts operate in the same context. Each is shaped by its own pupil profile, community, geography, workforce and existing strengths.
And that’s why no single model Inclusion Strategy can be applied across the board. The strongest strategies are not drawn from templates but instead emerge from an authentic understanding of the organisation itself.
In practical terms, this means the strategy cannot begin with generic statements. It needs to be rooted in the organisation’s own data and realities – how many pupils are receiving SEND support or have Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), what needs are most prevalent and what is getting in the way of learning, participation and attendance. Without this specificity, it becomes difficult to make meaningful decisions about where effort and investment should be directed.
Strategy before publication
An Inclusion Strategy should not be where the work begins. It should be where that work becomes visible and demonstrable – a fact that does make the December 31st deadline feel a little less generous.
Gaining a true understanding of your school or trust’s current position is what will allow you to make informed decisions about your strategy and where to prioritise funding. It allows leaders to move beyond assumptions and focus time, attention and resource where it will have the greatest impact.
Reflecting on inclusion by design is a key part of this process – considering strengths and development areas across the different elements that shape pupils’ experiences day to day. This, alongside a clear understanding of need and barriers, allows priorities to emerge with purpose rather than guesswork.
From here, planning investment becomes much clearer. Decisions about how funding is used are no longer reactive or made in isolation. They’re shaped by priorities that everyone agrees upon and are linked to workforce development and implementation. There’s a clearer sense of what needs to change, what actions will support that change and how it will be sustained over time.
By the time the strategy is written, it should not be setting out hypothetical intentions. It should contain a coherent approach that has already been carefully considered, collaboratively built and collectively understood.
Helpfully, the DfE template does encourage and give space for the deep work required. It asks schools to clearly set out their context, including barriers to learning and participation, and to show how their planned activity and funding are aligned to addressing those barriers. It also asks leaders to articulate their intent in a clear, accessible way, reflect the principles of inclusion and demonstrate how pupils and families have contributed through co-production. But these elements are only effective when they are grounded in genuine understanding – otherwise, they risk becoming well-presented sections without a clear through-line.
This is what allows a template to be used well – not as something to complete, but as something that clearly communicates well-developed thinking.
This is also why we have developed our Inclusion Strategy Preparation Toolkit: to help schools and trusts do the thinking before the writing, so that the final strategy is rooted in context, aligned to need and capable of guiding meaningful implementation.
The Inclusion Mainstream Fund and strategic investment
This context-first approach becomes particularly important when leaders are considering how the Inclusion Mainstream Fund is used.
The most powerful shift schools and trusts can make is to reframe the question they’re asking. Not ‘what shall we spend the money on?’ but ‘what are we trying to change as a result of this investment?’
When funding is aligned with clearly identified need, linked to agreed priorities and supported by a clear approach to implementation, it becomes purposeful. Over time, this also makes its impact easier to understand and evaluate.
The focus moves from activity to outcomes – from what we’ve done, to what difference it has made for children and young people.
We’ve written a blog going into more detail about the Inclusive Mainstream Fund, specifically. You can read it here.
From intention to implementation
At Supporting Education Group, we believe that implementation is where real change happens.
Policy and funding may create the conditions, but it is implementation that determines whether those opportunities translate into improved experiences and outcomes for pupils.
This belief is reflected in our Inclusion Strategy Preparation Toolkit, which is designed to help schools and trusts undertake the preparation needed before the strategy is written.
The toolkit supports leaders to understand their context, identify meaningful priorities, align investment and create a clear route from intention to implementation.
Alongside this, tools such as our SEND Lens evaluation can support leaders in building a clear, evidence-informed view of their current provision – providing a strong foundation for the strategic decisions that follow.
From there, we’ve set out how we can support MATs to use the Inclusive Mainstream Fund to take a whole-school/whole-MAT approach, ensuring that inclusion, workforce development and wider school improvement work together in harmony.
Read more on our SEND & Inclusion Hub website
Building, not just producing
The introduction of the Inclusive Mainstream Fund is offering schools and trusts a moment to do more than produce a strategy.
It is an opportunity to build one – deliberately, thoughtfully and with a clear line of sight from need to impact.
To reiterate, the Inclusion Strategy itself is ultimately not the work. It is the outcome of the work.
And when that work is done well, the strategy becomes what it should be: a clear, credible and confident expression of intent, grounded in understanding and built for lasting impact.