senco is designed for accountable school SEND workflows. The difference is not only the model output. It is the review process, the audit trail, the routing, the retention controls, and the non-diagnostic posture around every decision.
What procurement and governance teams usually need
Clear non-diagnostic product posture
Evidence that review and escalation stay accountable
Operational controls for retention, exports, and route ownership
A public path for SENCO, clinical, and safeguarding stakeholders to assess fit
| Capability | senco Structured SEND workflow with human review, audit trails, and governance built in. | Spreadsheets Flexible capture, but weak review governance, routing, and evidence traceability. | Generic chatbots Fast free text, but no durable workflow, comparison history, or operational controls. | Diagnosis-style classifiers Neat-looking labels, but too little context and risky shortcuts for SEND pathways. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teacher observations in natural language | Designed for narrative classroom evidence without forcing diagnosis labels. | Possible, but usually unstructured and hard to review consistently. | Possible, but often detached from the student record and school workflow. | Usually reduced to short prompts or checklists rather than rich context. |
| Human review before final reports | Built in. Reviewers can edit behaviours before finalisation and preserve the comparison history. | Manual and inconsistent, often spread across tabs, comments, and emails. | Not workflow-native. Edited outputs are easy to lose or overwrite. | Often skipped because the model output is treated as the answer. |
| Audit trail for escalation and exports | Owned tasks, notes, download history, retention events, and export status are persisted. | Requires manual version control and separate governance logs. | Usually no durable audit trail for prompts, edits, or follow-up actions. | May log scores, but rarely the surrounding review process and follow-up decisions. |
| Non-diagnostic posture | Public copy, trust guidance, and report wording all reinforce non-diagnostic SEND support. | Depends on local practice and can drift quickly between teams. | Depends on prompting and is easy to overstate without strong controls. | Often pushes people toward labels faster than the evidence supports. |
| Operational governance for school workflows | Includes pathway routing, retention controls, calibration governance, and protected APIs. | Needs separate tools and disciplined process to approximate this. | Typically lacks owner routing, retention visibility, and release governance. | Focuses on prediction rather than accountable operational follow-through. |
The public site now shows what needs to be true operationally before a pilot begins.
The product message stays tied to the actual governed workflows already implemented.
Sensitive school workflows need more than a model response and a copy button.
The marketing site now gives procurement and safeguarding stakeholders a clearer review path.
Open the public schools-and-trusts page for phased pilot guidance, role-readiness decisions, and deployment-oriented next steps.
View schools and trusts guidance