ALN, Home Education and “Suitable Education” After the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act

Published 12 May 2026

This is Part 3 of our five-part weekly series: The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act in Wales: A Five-Part Guide for ALN and Electively Home Educating Families.

In Part 1, we looked at what Welsh ALN and electively home educating families need to understand first.

In Part 2, we looked at what the Act may change for home-educating families in Wales, especially the difference between Elective Home Education, or EHE, and Education Otherwise Than At School, or EOTAS.

This article looks more closely at ALN, suitable education, IDPs and ALP.

The key message is simple:

A child does not stop having ALN because they are educated at home.

Home education may change who is organising the child’s day-to-day education. It does not automatically remove Welsh ALN rights, local authority duties, or the need to understand whether the child is receiving suitable education for their age, ability, aptitude and additional learning needs.

This matters because the new children not in school framework will make more children outside school visible to local authorities. If that visibility is not matched with good ALN understanding, there is a real risk that some families will be misunderstood.

In plain English

Home education is still lawful in Wales.

Parents who choose EHE usually take responsibility for providing and funding a suitable education.

But Welsh ALN law still matters.

Welsh Government’s March 2026 guidance on ALN and elective home education says that when a local authority becomes aware that a home-educated child may have ALN, the authority must decide whether the child has ALN. If the child has ALN, the local authority must prepare and maintain an IDP and secure the ALP set out in it [4].

That is the first key point.

The second key point is that EHE and EOTAS are not the same thing.

EHE is parent-chosen home education. EOTAS is education provision provided or commissioned by the local authority for learners who, for whatever reason, cannot attend a mainstream or special school [5].

The third key point is that a child being physically at home does not automatically mean the parent has freely chosen EHE.

A child may be at home because:

the parent has chosen elective home education
the child is still on roll but cannot attend
the child is waiting for EOTAS
the child is receiving EOTAS
a school placement has broken down
the child is on a reduced timetable
ALP in an IDP is not being delivered
there is no suitable placement
attendance pressure has escalated before ALN has been properly addressed

These are different situations.

The wrong label can lead to the wrong response.

What has changed, and what has not?

The new law does not erase the existing Welsh ALN system. But it may change how visible children outside school become to local authorities.

What appears to be changing

The children not in school framework is expected to bring:

more formal visibility of children educated outside school
a clearer local authority register framework
more structured information duties
possible local authority meetings with families
possible requests to see and speak with the child
more pressure to explain or evidence suitable education
future Welsh regulations and guidance setting out operational detail

What has not automatically changed

The new framework does not mean:

home education is banned
home education must look like school at home
home-educated children must follow the Curriculum for Wales
Welsh ALN rights disappear
an IDP becomes irrelevant because a child is home educated
EHE and EOTAS become the same thing
health needs disappear because a child is learning at home
disability social care needs disappear because a child is learning at home
every child at home is there because the parent has freely chosen full responsibility for education

That last point matters most for ALN families.

A child may be outside school because their parent has chosen home education.

Or they may be outside school because the system has not yet provided a suitable, accessible, safe or realistic education route.

Those are not the same.

The existing Welsh legal landscape still matters

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 is a UK Parliament Act, but it does not replace Wales’ existing ALN framework.

Wales already has its own statutory ALN system under the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018, often called the ALN Act. The ALN Act introduced the statutory Individual Development Plan, or IDP, and gives children, young people and parents rights to challenge certain ALN decisions [7], [8].

Welsh Government’s parent guide explains that an IDP should set out:

the learner’s additional learning needs
the additional learning provision needed
who will provide that support
what outcomes the support is intended to help achieve
where relevant, the setting or provision needed [8]

The guide also says that the ALP written into an IDP must be provided [8].

That matters.

If a child is outside school, the question should not only be:

Where is the child?

It should also be:

What does the child need in order to access education, and who is responsible for making that happen?

What counts as ALN?

Welsh Government guidance explains the legal test for ALN as a two-stage question.

First, does the child or young person have a learning difficulty or disability?

Second, does that difficulty or disability call for additional learning provision, or ALP [9]?

The ALN Act says a person has ALN if they have a learning difficulty or disability, whether or not it arises from a medical condition, which calls for ALP [7], [9].

For a child of compulsory school age, a learning difficulty or disability may mean the child:

has a significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of others of the same age, or
has a disability under the Equality Act 2010 that prevents or hinders them from making use of education or training facilities generally provided for others of the same age [9]

ALP means education or training provision that is additional to, or different from, that made generally for others of the same age [8], [9].

This matters for children outside school because a child may not look like they have “learning needs” in a narrow academic sense.

Their barrier may be:

sensory overload
anxiety
communication difficulty
autistic burnout
trauma
school-related distress
medical needs
a PDA profile
emotional regulation
mobility or physical access
fatigue
toileting or eating needs
difficulty using ordinary school facilities
inability to tolerate the environment where education is being delivered

If that difficulty or disability means the learner needs ALP, the ALN framework may still be relevant.

Suitable education must be suitable for this child

The phrase “suitable education” appears simple, but it carries a lot of weight.

Welsh Government’s elective home education guidance refers to section 7 of the Education Act 1996, which says parents must cause a child of compulsory school age to receive efficient full-time education suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and to any ALN the child may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise [3], [6].

That means suitability is not just about whether the education looks respectable to an adult.

For a child with ALN, suitability has to take account of the child’s actual needs.

A suitable education for one child may not be suitable for another.

For example, a child with sensory processing differences may not be able to access the same environment, pace or timetable as a child without those needs. A child with selective mutism may need communication adjustments. A child recovering from autistic burnout may need a phased, low-demand approach. A child with significant learning disability may need a curriculum based around communication, life skills and practical access. A young person with anxiety, trauma or medical needs may need education arranged in a way that does not make them more unwell.

This does not mean anything can be called suitable.

It means the suitability question must be child-specific.

A useful parent question is:

Suitable for whom, in what setting, with what support, and according to what evidence?

Home education does not automatically remove ALN duties

This is one of the most important points for families.

Welsh Government’s March 2026 guidance on ALN and elective home education states that if a local authority becomes aware that a home-educated child may have ALN, it must decide whether the child has ALN. If the child has ALN, the local authority must prepare and maintain an IDP and secure the ALP in that IDP [4].

This means a local authority should not simply treat home education as the end of the ALN conversation.

The position is more nuanced.

A parent who chooses EHE is generally responsible for providing suitable home education and may carry the financial responsibility for that education [3].

But where the child has ALN and an IDP is required or maintained, the local authority may still have duties under the ALN framework [4].

This is where parents need to be careful.

If a child has an IDP, parents may need to ask:

Who currently maintains the IDP?
Does the local authority maintain it?
Has the IDP been reviewed since the child became home educated?
What ALN is described in the plan?
What ALP is written into the plan?
Who is responsible for delivering each part of the ALP?
Is the ALP actually being delivered?
Has anyone suggested ceasing to maintain the IDP?
Has that decision been given in writing?
What are the child’s appeal or challenge rights?

We have written separately about what makes a good IDP review, because the IDP can become one of the most important documents in showing what the child needs and whether provision is actually happening.

EHE, EOTAS and system failure are different

The EHE/EOTAS distinction matters again here.

Elective Home Education is where a parent chooses to educate their child themselves instead of sending them to school. Parents who choose EHE usually take responsibility for organising and funding the education [3], [4].

Education Otherwise Than At School, or EOTAS, is different. Welsh Government describes EOTAS as education provision provided or commissioned by the local authority for learners who, for whatever reason, cannot attend a mainstream or special school [5].

So the simplest distinction is:

EHE means the parent has chosen to educate the child and usually carries the cost.

EOTAS means the local authority arranges or commissions education because the child cannot attend school.

But there is a third practical situation families often describe.

That is where a child is at home because the system has not made suitable provision.

This may include children who:

remain on roll but cannot attend
have been placed on a reduced timetable
are waiting for an IDP review
are waiting for a placement decision
are waiting for EOTAS
have been excluded or informally pushed out
have stopped attending because the environment is making them unsafe or unwell
have ALP in an IDP that is not being delivered
have become too anxious, burnt out or dysregulated to attend

Those children may be physically at home.

But that does not automatically mean the parent has made a free and settled choice to home educate.

This is where category mistakes can become serious.

If a child is wrongly treated as EHE when the real issue is failed provision, responsibility may be shifted onto the parent too quickly.

If a child needs EOTAS but is treated as though the parent has chosen EHE, the child may lose time, support and access to a planned education package.

If a child has an IDP but ALP is not being delivered, the question should not become only “why is the parent keeping the child at home?”

It should also be:

What provision was supposed to be in place, and why has it not enabled this child to access education?

We have written more about the difference between EOTAS and home education in Wales, and families trying to understand EOTAS may also find EOTAS in Wales: Part 1 useful.

Where the new Act may create pressure points

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act does not remove home education as an option in Wales. Welsh Government says the children not in school provisions will ensure better local authority oversight, and that when local authorities assess the suitability of education, they must consider any ALN and whether the education being provided is suitable to those needs [2].

That sounds sensible in principle.

The risk is in implementation.

For ALN families, the pressure points may include:

whether local authorities understand the child’s ALN before judging suitability
whether refusal, silence or distress is misread as parental obstruction
whether children with anxiety, selective mutism, trauma or communication needs are approached appropriately
whether EHE is confused with EOTAS
whether “home educated” is used too quickly where school provision has failed
whether IDPs are reviewed properly
whether ALP is actually delivered
whether health and social care needs are considered where they affect education access
whether parents are blamed for consequences of unmet need
whether safeguarding questions are asked in a way that is proportionate, disability-aware and trauma-informed

This is why the new framework must not become a simple checklist.

If the child is not in school, the system needs to know more than that fact.

It needs to understand the pathway that got the child there.

A cultural shift for elective home education in Wales

For many elective home educating families, especially those who have been home educating for years, low contact with the local authority has often been seen as normal, protective or preferable.

That history matters.

Some families have had respectful contact with their local authority. Others have experienced misunderstanding, poor disability literacy, unnecessary suspicion, or pressure to make education look more school-like than it needs to be.

The new children not in school framework may require a cultural shift on both sides.

For families, it may mean being more ready to provide clear information, explain the child’s education, keep simple records, and respond to formal contact in writing.

For local authorities, it should mean approaching families with better ALN awareness, clearer explanations, proportionate requests, and an understanding that home education does not have to replicate school.

This is not about parents giving up autonomy.

It is about recognising that the legal environment is changing, and that clear, calm, evidenced communication may become more important than ever.

A family may see minimal engagement as a boundary.

A local authority may interpret it as lack of information, refusal, or concern about suitability.

That gap in interpretation is where conflict may grow.

If a parent disagrees with a request, it may be safer to respond calmly in writing, ask for the legal basis, explain any ALN, health or safety concern, and request reasonable adjustments, rather than simply ignoring contact.

That does not mean families should accept everything uncritically.

It means that, in a more formal system, written clarity may become one of the best protections families have.

What about voluntary home education groups and meet-ups?

One question Welsh families may have is whether the new framework changes anything for local home education groups.

Across Wales, many home-educating families rely on informal, voluntary groups. These may include park meet-ups, learning activities, social groups, trips, online communities, teen groups, parent networks, and occasional sessions organised by parents or grandparents.

These groups can be immensely valuable.

Elective home education should not mean education in isolation. For many families, especially those with ALN children, local groups help children build friendships, practise social skills, share interests, access activities, and meet other young people who do not fit easily into school-based routes.

At the same time, parents are right to think about safeguarding, inclusion and accessibility. Some ALN children and teenagers may be more vulnerable than their peers. Depending on the child’s needs, parents may want reassurance about who is organising a group, who supervises children, what the boundaries are, whether adults have been vetted, and how concerns would be handled.

At the time of writing, we have not seen Welsh guidance saying that ordinary informal parent-led home education social groups are automatically regulated settings, or that every parent volunteer organiser must have a DBS check.

What we do know is that Welsh Government says the new children not in school measures will include a duty on certain out-of-school education settings to provide information to local authorities if they are providing education to children not in school. The detailed criteria will be set out in regulations and guidance [2].

That means this is an area where more Welsh clarification is needed.

There is a difference between:

a parent-supervised park meet-up
families sharing ideas in a WhatsApp group
a one-off museum trip
a regular social group where parents stay
a tutor or adult regularly teaching children
a setting providing structured education while parents are not actively involved
an arrangement that may amount to full-time education at one location

Those situations should not all be treated as if they are the same.

Welsh Government’s current EHE guidance already recognises that parents may educate in groups with other home-educated children. It also warns that where five or more learners of compulsory school age, or one learner who is looked after or has SEN, an IDP or EHCP, are provided with full-time education at a single location outside a maintained school, the arrangement may fall within independent school rules [3].

DBS rules are activity-based. Current DBS guidance for England and Wales says regulated activity with children depends on what the adult is doing, how often, whether they are teaching, training, instructing, caring for or supervising children, and whether other conditions are met [12].

For parents, the practical question is not only “does the law require a DBS check?”

It may also be:

Who is organising the group?
Are parents expected to stay?
Who is supervising the children?
Are adults ever alone with children?
Are private messages allowed between adults and children?
Who manages trips, transport or lifts?
What happens if a child has ALN, sensory needs, communication needs or poor danger awareness?
How are bullying, exclusion or safeguarding concerns handled?
Is the group accessible and inclusive for disabled children or ALN learners?
Does the group understand that volunteer parents cannot be expected to operate like a school?

This is where peer knowledge matters.

Because these groups are often unfunded and volunteer-led, they ebb and flow. A group may be active for a year and then fade as children grow up, families move, interests change, organisers burn out or volunteer capacity changes.

Parents should not assume that every area has the same offer, or that every group will suit every child.

It can be worth asking other parents what is currently available, what the atmosphere is like, whether parents stay, whether ALN children are included well, and whether the group feels safe and accessible.

This is one of the useful roles of the LWL online community. Parents can ask where their nearest groups are, what local options exist, and what other families have found helpful. Peer support cannot replace safeguarding judgement, but it can help families navigate an ever-changing landscape.

This is also an area where LWL would welcome clearer Welsh Government guidance.

The challenge is to protect children without accidentally damaging the informal peer networks that make home education viable for many families.

Are there gaps or tensions between the new Act and Welsh ALN law?

There is not necessarily a direct legal conflict on paper.

Welsh Government’s position is that the children not in school provisions do not remove home education as an option and do not change the need to consider ALN when assessing suitability [2].

The ALN Act and ALN Code still sit underneath Welsh ALN decision-making [7], [8], [9].

The gap is not necessarily between the words of the laws.

The gap may be between Welsh legal duties and day-to-day implementation.

1. Visibility may increase faster than support

The new children not in school framework may make children outside school more visible to local authorities.

But visibility is not the same as support.

If a child is recorded but still does not receive suitable education, ALP, health input, social care assessment or EOTAS planning where needed, the register may identify the problem without solving it.

That is a major risk.

2. Suitability may be judged without enough ALN understanding

The law and guidance point towards considering ALN when judging suitable education [2], [3], [4].

But in practice, the quality of that judgement depends on the local authority having enough evidence and enough disability literacy.

For example, a child recovering from burnout may not be learning in a visible school-like way. A child with sensory needs may not tolerate conventional lessons. A child with PDA-type demand avoidance may engage more through indirect or interest-led learning. A child with communication needs may not demonstrate knowledge on demand.

If the assessor expects school-like evidence, they may miss education that is real but different.

Equally, if a child is not receiving suitable education, that should not be ignored.

The issue is that the judgement must be properly informed.

3. EHE may be used to mask unmet public duties

Some parents freely choose EHE.

Others feel pushed into it after provision has failed.

The children not in school framework needs to distinguish those situations clearly.

If it does not, some families may be treated as though they have chosen full responsibility when they have actually been left without a workable education route.

That is not only unfair to parents.

It risks hiding system failure.

4. ALN rights may exist, but families may not know how to enforce them

Welsh Government guidance says children, parents and young people have rights to challenge ALN decisions they disagree with, including decisions about whether the child has ALN, how ALN is described, the ALP in the IDP, and who maintains the IDP [8].

But many parents do not know how to use those rights.

This is where navigation matters.

A right that families cannot understand, access or use is not doing its full job.

We have written a separate guide on how to challenge an ALN decision in Wales.

5. Informal peer spaces may remain unclear

The new framework may make children not in school more visible, and it may create information duties for some out-of-school education settings.

But it does not yet clearly answer every question about informal, voluntary, parent-led home education groups.

That matters because those groups are often where children build friendships, practise social interaction, access activities and avoid isolation.

For ALN children, the quality, safety and accessibility of those groups may make a real difference.

Wales needs clarity that protects children without treating every parent volunteer as if they are running a school.

What about health?

Health can be central to whether a child can access education.

A child may be outside school because of:

anxiety
autistic burnout
trauma
chronic illness
fatigue
eating or toileting difficulties
sensory processing differences
sleep problems
pain
mental health needs
neurodevelopmental needs
physical disability
medication or treatment effects

At the time of writing, we do not yet know exactly how the Welsh children not in school framework will operate in practice, or how consistently it will connect with health services.

What we do know is that the Welsh ALN system already expects collaboration with professionals, including health professionals, where relevant to the child’s IDP [8].

We also know that if health needs affect access to education, they should not be treated as separate from the education question.

For parents, useful questions may include:

Has health evidence been considered?
Has the child’s GP, paediatrician, CAMHS clinician, therapist, nurse, occupational therapist or other professional provided relevant information?
Are health needs affecting attendance, learning, stamina or safety?
Is the child well enough to access the education being proposed?
Does the IDP describe health-related barriers where they affect learning?
Is any ALP dependent on health advice or therapeutic input?
If the child cannot attend school for health reasons, what education arrangement is being made?

The new Act does not automatically create a full joined-up health pathway for every child outside school.

That may be one of the gaps.

If health needs are one of the reasons children lose access to education, then any children not in school framework that does not connect properly with health risks seeing the child but not understanding the reason.

Some children outside school may also need social care support.

That does not mean the issue is child protection.

Social care in Wales is not only about child protection. The Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 provides the framework for care and support in Wales. Its principles include voice and control, prevention and early intervention, and well-being [10].

Law Wales explains that well-being includes areas such as physical and mental health, emotional well-being, protection from abuse and neglect, education, training and recreation, domestic, family and personal relationships, securing rights and entitlements, social and economic well-being, and suitable living accommodation. For a child, well-being also includes physical, intellectual, emotional, social and behavioural development [11].

That matters because education breakdown can affect the whole family.

A child may need support with:

personal care
toileting
eating
sleep
mobility
danger awareness
communication
supervision
behaviour that reflects distress or unmet need
access to community activities
short breaks
family sustainability

A parent may need support as a carer.

At the time of writing, we do not yet know how consistently the new children not in school framework will link families to disability social care assessments or carers’ support where needed.

That is another possible gap.

If a child is outside school because the education environment has broken down, and the family is now managing high levels of care, risk or supervision at home, the response should not only be:

Is the parent educating?

It may also need to be:

Does this child or family need care and support?

Does the parent need support as a carer?

Would earlier social care support help prevent crisis or placement breakdown?

What changes for parents in practical terms?

Until Welsh Government publishes further regulations and guidance, not every operational detail is clear.

But parents can expect that children not in school may become more formally recorded and discussed.

The practical impact may look different depending on how the child came to be outside school.

For long-standing elective home educating families, the main shift may be more formal contact, more expectation to provide information, and more need to explain suitable education clearly.

For families whose children are at home after school breakdown, the priority may be category clarity, IDP review, EOTAS discussion, attendance pressure, ALP evidence and written decision-making.

For families receiving EOTAS, the issue may be ensuring everyone understands that local authority arranged education is not the same as parent-led EHE.

For ALN families, the practical preparation is less about panic and more about clarity.

Parents may want to be ready to explain:

whether the child is EHE, EOTAS, still on roll, absent, or without suitable provision
whether the child has ALN
whether there is an IDP
who maintains the IDP
what ALP is written into the IDP
whether ALP is being delivered
why the child is not attending school, if they are still on roll
what education is happening at home, if the child is EHE
what health needs affect education
what disability or care needs affect daily life
what support has been requested
what decisions have been made in writing
what evidence exists

This does not mean parents need to produce a legal bundle every time someone asks a question.

It means that when systems are formalised, families are better protected if the facts are clear.

What parents can ask for in writing

If your child has ALN and is outside school, or at risk of becoming outside school, useful written questions may include:

Please confirm whether my child is being treated as electively home educated, absent from school, receiving EOTAS, waiting for EOTAS, or without suitable provision.
Please confirm whether the local authority accepts that my child may have ALN.
Please confirm who is responsible for deciding whether my child has ALN.
Please confirm whether an IDP is being prepared, maintained, reviewed, or ceased.
Please identify the ALP currently in place.
Please confirm who is responsible for securing each part of the ALP.
Please explain how my child’s ALN has been considered when assessing suitable education.
Please explain how health evidence has been considered.
Please explain whether a referral to, or advice from, relevant health professionals is needed.
Please explain whether disability social care or carer support should be considered.
Please confirm what decision has been made and how we can challenge it if we disagree.

These questions are not about being difficult.

They are about preventing category confusion.

This is exactly the kind of confusion Learn Without Limits CIC is trying to help families navigate.

The problem is rarely one simple issue.

A child may be described as having an attendance problem when the real issue is unmet ALN.

A parent may be described as choosing home education when the real issue is a failed placement.

A child may be described as refusing school when the real issue is anxiety, sensory overload, trauma, health or lack of ALP.

A family may be sent between education, health and social care, with each service looking only at its own part of the picture.

LWL’s Prevent, Bridge, Progress model is designed to sit in that gap.

Prevent means helping families understand rights, duties, support routes and escalation points before breakdown becomes unavoidable.

Bridge means supporting families and young people during the difficult middle space where education may already be disrupted, trust may be damaged, and a route back into learning or progression needs to be rebuilt.

Progress means helping families move towards the right next step, whether that is school, EOTAS, further education, training, supported employment, statutory review, or another appropriate route.

The purpose is not to replace statutory services.

The purpose is to help families understand the maze, ask better questions, keep better records, and avoid being pushed into the wrong category.

That is why digital navigation infrastructure matters.

A properly governed navigation layer could help identify recurring gaps between Welsh policy and family experience, especially around ALN, EHE, EOTAS, health, social care and children not in school.

It could also reduce the need for families to keep retelling distressing stories from scratch.

This is co-production as a working model, not co-production as a label.

We will also be discussing these issues through our parent sessions and briefings. Upcoming sessions are listed on our events page.

The key message

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act may make children outside school more visible to local authorities.

But visibility alone will not protect ALN children’s education.

For Welsh ALN families, the key questions remain:

Does the child have ALN?
Is an IDP required or maintained?
What ALP is needed?
Is that ALP being delivered?
Is the education suitable for this child’s age, ability, aptitude and ALN?
Is the child genuinely electively home educated?
Is the child receiving EOTAS?
Is the child at home because suitable provision has not been made?
Are health and social care needs affecting education access?
Are informal peer spaces safe, accessible and appropriate for this child?
Who is responsible for doing what?

The new framework must not confuse parental choice with system failure.

It must also not damage the informal peer networks that help many home-educating families avoid isolation.

A child does not stop having ALN because they are educated at home.

A parent does not automatically become responsible for replacing a failed education system because their child is no longer sitting in a classroom.

And monitoring a child outside school is not the same as securing suitable education.

If Wales wants the children not in school framework to work safely, it must understand why children are outside school, not simply record that they are.

It must be implemented in a way that respects Welsh ALN law, Welsh well-being duties, health realities, disability support needs, informal peer support, and the lived experience of families whose children are already at risk of being pushed out of education.

Legal disclaimer

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. It reflects our understanding of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026, Welsh Government guidance, Welsh ALN law and related social care frameworks at the time of writing.

The practical operation of the children not in school measures in Wales will depend on future regulations, guidance and implementation by Welsh Ministers and local authorities. Families facing individual decisions about home education, school attendance, ALN, EOTAS, IDPs, health, social care, safeguarding, domestic abuse or legal proceedings should seek advice from a suitably qualified legal professional or specialist advice organisation.