Strategic Review of Current SEN Provision and Transformation Agenda

Committee for Education

23092026 Strategic Review of Current SEN provision and Transformation Agenda -final.pdf (792.49 kb)

Summary of Recommendations

Written Submissions

61. The Committee received 51 written submissions to its call for evidence on the review with submissions coming from parents, teachers, support staff, charities, and specialist bodies. Stakeholders identified the following concerns:
62. Mainstream settings lack the capacity to support complex needs with SPiMs sometimes used as a pressure valve with some children continuing to be placed in schools that cannot meet their needs. A nursery teacher stated in their response that “Inclusion is happening by default, but without sufficient resources”.  It was also noted that some children with sensory impairments face inaccessible environments and difficulty accessing learning materials. Diverse Youth suggested that “Inclusion must go beyond placement to ensure belonging, cultural understanding, and safety”.
63. Many submissions raised concerns about the need for early diagnosis and the lack of support for children while this process takes place. A nursery schoolteacher indicated that in their experience “Children often wait their entire nursery year without being seen”. The time taken for the assessment process was highlighted with stakeholders indicating that there are significant delays in assessment with many waiting 2+ years.
64. Stakeholders describe the statementing process as adversarial, unclear, and often producing vague or inaccurate statements. Parents felt that the statementing process was a battle, overly focused on process and bureaucracy rather than outcomes, and many pointed to delays beyond the 26-week target. Parents indicated concerns that statements were not reflecting real needs (especially outside classroom hours) and that the annual review process was inconsistent. Concerns were also raised about the number of children starting school without statements.
65. Many responses from staff and professional bodies pointed to shortages of qualified staff including Educational Psychologists, Speech and Language Therapists, Occupational Therapists, and specialist teaching staff. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists noted that “Northern Ireland now has more children waiting for speech therapy per head of population than any other UK region”.
66. Many children are placed in settings that cannot meet their needs with stakeholders indicating that there are insufficient Moderate Learning Difficulty and Severe Learning difficulty places available with the Children’s Law Centre stating that “SPiMS are being used as a crisis response to a lack of suitable specialist placements”.  The National Deaf Children’s Society highlighted the lack of pre-school resource provision for deaf children.
67. Therapies are described as inconsistent, underfunded, and often unavailable. Concerns were raised about the reduction in face-to-face therapy and gaps in access to speech and language therapy particularly in specialist units. Angel Eyes referred to the barriers to independence faced by pupils with visual impairment and that assistive technology is underused due to lack of staff training.
68. Stakeholders describe fragmented systems across education, health, and social care with unclear responsibilities, children falling between systems and parents having to act as coordinators. Stakeholders pointed out poor coordination between education and health leading to delays in diagnosis and support.
69. A number of parents referred to concerns about transport and safeguarding for vulnerable children. They raised concerns about weak vetting processes for transport staff, inconsistent escort provision and the use of unsafe or unsuitable vehicles. The impact of long travel distances for some pupils and the resulting fatigue and missed learning was also highlighted.
70. Funding pressures are described as severe and system wide with insufficient funding impacting staffing levels, specialist services, post 19 provision and schools being unable to meet needs within existing budgets. The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland suggested that the “Success of SEN Reform is dependent on significant and sustainable funding”
71. Transitions are described by stakeholders as some of the most vulnerable points with some children being left without placements, a lack of continuity as a child moves from school to Further Education creating limited pathways for independence.
72. The Department set out a clear linear continuum from governance reviews to transformation rationale, but the people reflecting their experience of current provision indicated that more work needs to be done to address their feedback and lived experience.
73. DE advised that they would most meaningfully brief the Committee not on right time, right place, right person, right support aspects of the SEN Transformation Agenda but on their transformation pilot projects.
74. During the Committee’s inquiry, the Department received transformation funding; piloted a number of projects; had the Transformation Board review its projects while they were still under way; and conserved the entire funding for a revised number of projects. The Committee has sought detailed costings.
75. It was the Committee’s initial intention to take a quick snapshot of the SEN landscape with a view to informing the Department’s implementation of its SEN reforms. The request to consider the projects has extended the life of the Committee’s strategic review, and the Committee duly took the opportunity to ensure it had explored in its evidence sessions the full range of perspectives.
76. Within written and oral submissions, the Committee heard analysis, discussion and recommendations from key stakeholders such as Middletown Centre for Autism, Children’s Law Centre and the Independent Autism Reviewer.
77. Middletown Centre for Autism is an all-island centre of excellence for autism and partner in the Department’s SEN reform work, although it receives just 0.25% of the Department’s SEN budget. It offered a commentary on the potential of the reform agenda as follows:

Transformation Agenda

78. NAHTpresented to the Committee its May 2025 report on Effective Early Intervention and advised that having considered the Graduated Response Framework published by EA since then, it must conclude that the current statementing process and graduated response framework did not serve the needs of children in nursery schools, even if the school is identifying those needs.
79. The authors advised that we need to move to a system that:

80. Children’s Law Centre gave a very detailed report to the Committee which it will perhaps wish to clarify in light of receipt of the new draft Code of Practice which has issued since then.
81. Detailed observations by Children’s Law Centre are listed below:

80. The Independent Autism Reviewer advised that the Transformation Agenda was a fragile opportunity, that the system was starting to respond, and the EA seemed to have the right attitude.

She made the following commentary, dealing in particular with culture, language and placements, and advised critical actions points as below:

Irish-medium Education

83. The Committee heard from Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta and Coláiste Feirste through meetings, engagement events and written evidence. Representatives from the Irish-medium sector strongly argued that the Department of Education and the Education Authority should develop a long term plan to provide these schools with staff trained in immersion pedagogy; plan realistically for accommodation needs for IME rather than focusing exclusively on current inadequate spaces; learn from more advanced bilingualism and immersion practices elsewhere; improve support by EA by providing a bespoke immersion module; and ensure the EA has dedicated resources to support Irish-medium pupils, particularly when they are moving between stages of education.

Inclusion

84. The Department provided significant literature in response to the Committee’s request for comparative best practice briefing in relation to 1:1 ratios, which chimed with the key challenge of maintaining statutory compliance while moving towards an inclusive system.
85. DE advised that “Inclusion is not a policy; it is a practice.
86. “In the legislation and the code of practice, there is a presumption of mainstream. The European Agency has done quite a bit of work for us, under a technical support instrument, to look at how inclusive our entire legislation is. Then, it is looking not just at special educational needs but across every policy in the Education Department — whether it is youth policy, school improvement policy, admissions policy, or area planning policy — to see how inclusive it is”. DE, October 2025
87. DE also advised that it will carry out training in “inclusive capacity building” using transformation funding.
88. One principal who was incredulous at the increase in teacher bureaucracy as a means to meet additional needs brought the notion of community to the fore, noting that “The education bureaucracy is struggling to prioritise the protection of the school as the preeminent frontline institution best capable of positively impacting upon the development of children. The failure to appropriately utilise other public organisations, both within education and other Departments, continues to diminish the capacity of schools to function in an optimal manner”.
89. Victoria Graf advised the Committee that general education in the US has for 50 years been inclusive of the vast majority of pupils.
90. “Very few students cannot thrive in general education. Here many students with mild learning difficulties or autism, or indeed complex medical needs may be found in special provision, even though they could thrive in general education. For example, many physical conditions, such as cerebral palsy, do not impact a student’s cognitive abilities or learning capacity. So, the mindset and emphasis of inclusion prioritises general education to allow every student to achieve their full potential and values interaction with peers (precluding isolation later on).
91. She advised that the practice in US was to, and the system here might helpfully “Focus not on disability, labelling and fear but on TPL and improving education system in the long term”.
92. She also flagged the cultural point that separating children on behavioural grounds narrows what is acceptable to a very limited profile and implies that of their learning is less important than those who conform. This is not beneficial overall.
93. Early in the Review, the Committee sought to understand the recent increase in the number of children with statements, and engaged with the EA to seek statistics and with RaISe to gain a better understanding of terms, categories, comparability, etc. Having gathered some helpful information, the Committee subsequently aligned its review primarily with the needs and best outcomes of the child as they present and just as they are. 
94. Professor Graf mentioned that indeed there is an observable increase in the number of students diagnosed with disabilities in various regions, including the United States and Scandinavia, as well as in Portugal, a country known for its inclusion efforts. She advises that “This rise can be attributed to a better understanding of neurodivergence and changes in diagnostic criteria, such as the broader definition of autism.
95. Prof Graf concludes that “However, this situation should not be viewed negatively; instead, it calls for a re-evaluation of educational methods to accommodate diverse learning needs”.
96. The Independent Autism Reviewer has engaged at several key points in the Committee’s Strategic Review, and has also discussed the importance of culture in extending belonging, participation, security via our systems for supporting pupils with SEN.
97. Most recently, she wrote to the Committee with some high-level system conclusions and recommendations to assist with framing challenges most positively.
98. The Autism Reviewer’s key findings based on a niche literature digest are as follows:
    • Reform must be judged by children's experiences;
    • Culture is the foundation of effective inclusion;
    • Workforce capability is the critical enabler of reform;
    • Children should not have to reach crisis before they become visible;
    • Inclusion requires educational environments to adapt;
    • Educational participation depends upon effective health and education integration; and
    • Northern Ireland measures activity better than outcomes.
99. Further, she offers key questions to measure success:
    • How will the Department demonstrate that children are better off under the Enhanced Support Model than they were previously?
    • For accountability in areas that require DE and DoH collaboration, who is the responsible owner of the outcome?
    • Does the transformation agenda, like any reasonable educational process, comprise early identification, understanding of needs, immediate needs-led support, graduated support and review, access to specialist advice, escalation and accountability, transition planning and monitoring of outcomes?
100. Kingston Bryars addressed the Committee in informal and virtual format, and advised on several key points from his experience:
     • Expectations are low for disabled pupils in special schools; staff not trained or equipped adequately to help pupils achieve;
     • Focus on physical disability precluded assisting with learning difficulties such as dyslexia, with consequences for exam performance;
     • Prefers term “additional needs” to “special needs” terminology which leads to bullying;
     • Transition support was significantly lacking; Kingston experienced a confusing and unsatisfactory transition from school.

Committee Conclusions: Snapshot

SEN Support and Workforce

101. As a priority action, the current bureaucracy seen in the delivery of school-based SEN support, especially Local Impact Teams, must be reduced.
102. A clear statement which clarifies the new role and responsibilities of Educational Psychologists should be provided.
103. Enhanced investment should be provided to Local Impact Teams, with an urgent immediate focus on providing adequate behavioural support services.
104. Discussion and planning should begin between Education and Health colleagues as soon as possible to understand how Allied Health Professionals can form part of the Local Impact Teams model.
105. The current approach to SEN placements represents a crisis that is now normalised and a failure to address this issue places all other areas of wider SEN reform at risk. Priority should be given to resolving the annual placement crisis via the publication of an action plan that ensures placements are planned, appropriate, data informed and non-discriminatory.
106. SEN placements should follow an area-based planning approach, where the assumption and preference is that children should be educated in their local community where possible.
107. As part of Initial Teacher Education in Northern Ireland, all students should receive adequate SEN training, regardless of the institution they attend or pathway they have chosen. Consideration should also be given to the introduction of SEN PGCE.
108. The Department of Education must urgently delivery fit for purpose and child-rights centred guidance on the use of restraint and seclusion in mainstream and special schools. Article 4(1) c of the Education (NI) Order 1998 which enables teachers to use force to stop pupils “engaging in any behaviour prejudicial to the maintenance of good order and discipline” must also be repealed as soon as possible. David Brooks MLA and Julie Middleton MLA recorded their position that they did not agree with the Committee’s call for the repeal of Article 4(1)c of the Education (NI) Order 1998 at this time.
109. The Department of Education should bring forward the review of Middletown Centre for Autism as a priority action in order to ensure its role in educating and disseminating good practice is enhanced.

Irish-Medium Provision

110. The Department of Education should work with Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta and relevant stakeholders to develop a targeted plan to address SEN workforce challenges within the Irish-medium sector, including the recruitment, training and retention of Irish-speaking educational psychologists, SENCOs, classroom assistants, specialist teachers and allied health professionals.
111. The Department of Education and Education Authority should ensure that children educated through the medium of Irish have equitable access to SEN assessment, intervention and support services, including the provision of Irish-language pathways where appropriate.
112. As Specialist Provision in Mainstream (SPIM) expands across the education system, the Department of Education and Education Authority should ensure that children educated through the medium of Irish have equitable access to specialist provision, including consideration of Irish-medium specialist units and appropriate outreach support. This recommendation is made in the context of a wider accommodation crisis facing IME which directly impacts on the sector's ability to take on SPIMs.
113. SEN training and professional development opportunities should be made available through the medium of Irish where appropriate, ensuring that staff working within Irish-medium settings can access high-quality professional learning without linguistic barriers.

SENCOs

114. A review of SENCO workload should be undertaken urgently. This should include timely and practical interventions to address the sustainability of the SENCO role and workload.

Classroom Assistants

115. Where 1:1 support from a classroom assistant is assessed as the best way to meet a child’s needs, this should be detailed and quantified on their statement and EA must be clear that new models of support.
116. EA should also ensure that support detailed in statements of special educational needs is not limited to the offer of 1 – 1 classroom assistant support as the sole delivery mechanism to meet children's needs in every case. Statements should detail supports that are quantified but flexibility must be afforded to ensure a range of supports can be considered for inclusion in a statement
117. The EA should urgently progress work to enhance the Classroom Assistant role. This should include clear job roles and descriptions, fair pay and conditions and the creation of professional pathways of progression within the role. This work is vital if other areas of SEN reform are to be a success.

Early Years

118. Clear early intervention services should be established across the system, and these should not just be confined to pilot projects. This should include mechanisms to ensure that the right support is available for children at the point at which need is identified, the protection of the SEN Inclusion Fund and the availability of Classroom Assistants, as standard, to all nursery and pre-school classes.
119. Pre-school settings should receive equality of SEN support, regardless of statutory or non-statutory status. 
120. The Graduated Response Framework should not act as a barrier to accessing support for those most in need at the very start of their education.
121. The EA should review safe staffing levels in pre-school settings to ensure that the appropriate number of staff are in place to meet the growing complexity of need.
122. Dedicated investment should be provided to develop and make available Irish-language SEN resources, assessment tools, early intervention programmes and parental support materials to ensure children can access support in their language of education from the earliest stage possible.

Special Schools

123. The EA and Department of Education, in collaboration with the Department of Health, should urgently bring forward a policy on the future provision of nursing in special schools. The current disparity within provision across Northern Ireland risks unsafe provision and inequity of cover.
124. As part of wider SEN reform, the EA should undertake regular dialogue and engagement with special school leaders on issues that directly impact them.
125. The EA should adopt a more responsive approach to maintenance and estate issues, ensuring that works which are urgently required to provide safe services for children are prioritised.

Working with Health

126. An action plan should be designed and implemented to improve data sharing between Health and Education, particularly within Early Years provisions.
127. A formal mechanism should be introduced to refer children from Health services into appropriate Education support services.
128. The Department of Health and the EA should move from the current process of co-operation by means of meetings and engagement, into a collaborative partnership which jointly plans and commissions shared SEN services. This should include clear actions and goals, with dedicated timelines for implementation.

Transitions/Post-19

129. Transition planning should be appropriately aligned with local trust provisions and eligibility criteria for access. This should include consideration of the allocation of a social worker and the processes leading to diagnosis of intellectual disability, if appropriate, to enable access to local Trust services or direct payments
130. The Committee supports the introduction of legislation in the next mandate for the provision of post-19 Health and Education plans. The EA must ensure that transition planning is effective and consistent.
131. Effective cross-departmental working should begin between the Department of Education, the Department of Health, the Department for the Economy and the Department for Communities on ensuring the provision of adequate pathways for school leavers with SEND.

SEN Reform and Policy

132. The SEN Reform Agenda and Action Plan are too complex. The Department of Education and EA must refine these down to a number of key actions that everyone in the system supports and understands. These should be appropriately invested in and delivered, with timescales for implementation easily available alongside regular updates on progress.
133. An Inclusive Education policy should be published. This should clearly set out the roles of both mainstream provision, specialist provision in a mainstream setting and special schools within our system.
134. The EA should be cognisant of the current level of pressure felt by all staff within our schools. Whilst schools are calling for reform and improvement, this must be delivered in a way that doesn’t further overwhelm an already fragile system. Reform must be delivered at a pace the system can reasonably manage.
135. Whilst we acknowledge that the amount of spend on SEN support services has risen significantly, SEN reform should not be seen as a cost-saving exercise. Instead, it should be driven by ensuring our resources are used to deliver the best outcomes possible for children and young people. The committee hopes that if resource is utilised at the point of need, through effective early intervention measures, then this will prevent a further escalation of need.
136. The Department of Education should collect, monitor and publish data relating to SEN prevalence, assessments, support provision, placements and workforce availability within the Irish-medium sector to ensure future planning and resource allocation are informed by need.
137. The Committee recognises that becoming a more inclusive education system is a gradual process. Achieving this will require more training for staff, greater confidence among teachers and schools, a larger workforce, better cooperation between organisations, and changes in attitudes and culture.
138. The Committee considers the lack of structural and systemic collaboration between DE and DoH as fundamental to this review and urges development of a framework for sharing of accountability between DE and DoH by end 2026.
139. The Committee considers eye-watering transport costs a symptom of contorted area planning and recommends that capital efforts be directed to developing learning environments capable of delivering local provision.
140. The Committee considers as priority transformation challenges: SEN placements; Health/Education joint accountability; early intervention; workforce capability; and simplification of SEN reform delivery.
141. The Committee considers that clear ownership of roles and responsibilities is crucial. To avoid inordinate responsibility falling on schools, as a rule of thumb the Committee proposes that:
     • The Department of Education should own policy, entitlement, funding priorities and system reform.
     • The Education Authority should own operational delivery, workforce planning, placements and support services.
     • Schools should implement support for children but should not be left carrying responsibility for systemic failures in assessment, placement, staffing or health input.
     • The Department of Health should have formal responsibility where children’s needs require Allied Health, nursing, therapeutic, diagnostic or social care input.
142. The Committee also urges the Department to check its progress via the Autism Reviewer’s questions, namely:
     • How will the Department demonstrate that children are better off under the Enhanced Support Model than they were previously?
     • For accountability in areas that require DE and DoH collaboration, who is the responsible owner of the outcome?     
     • Does the transformation agenda, like any reasonable educational process, comprise early identification, understanding of needs, immediate needs-led support, graduated support and review, access to specialist advice, escalation and accountability, transition planning and monitoring of outcomes?

Key Committee Recommendations

143. Finally, the Committee makes 15 key recommendations as follows and requests that the Minister report on these on an annual and rolling basis throughout the life of the SEN transformation action plan.
     • That DE simplify and refocus the SEN Reform Agenda by reducing the current complexity of actions into a smaller number of clear, measurable priorities, with published timelines and regular progress updates.
     • That EA reduce bureaucracy in school-based SEN support, including Local Impact Teams and referral processes, so that support is easier for schools and families to access.
     • That EA strengthen Local Impact Teams through enhanced investment, urgent behavioural support capacity, clear operational data, and regular public reporting on impact, equality and outcomes.
     • That DE publish an urgent SEN placement action plan to address the annual placement crisis, ensuring placements are planned, appropriate, data-informed, non-discriminatory and based on local community provision where possible.
     • That DE develop and publish an Inclusive Education policy setting out the respective roles of mainstream schools, specialist provision in mainstream settings, and special schools.
     • That EA improve access to Educational Psychology by clarifying the future role of Educational Psychologists and ensuring schools can access support at the point of need.
     • That DE invest in workforce capability across the system, including mandatory SEN training in Initial Teacher Education, consistent continuing professional development, autism/neuro-affirming practice, and practical classroom-based support.
     • That DE review and support the SENCO role urgently, including workload, sustainability, protected time and the practical supports needed to make the role deliverable.
     • That EA reform and professionalise the Classroom Assistant role, including clear job descriptions, fair pay and conditions, career progression, and quantified support in statements where 1:1 support is required.
     • That DE establish clear early intervention services across all settings, not limited to pilots, ensuring support is available when need is first identified and that the Graduated Response Framework does not delay help for children with the highest level of need.
     • That DE ensure equality of SEN support in early years and pre-school provision, including statutory and non-statutory settings, safe staffing levels, and access to classroom assistant support where required.
     • That DE address SEN inequity in Irish-medium education, including Irish-language assessment pathways, workforce planning, specialist provision, training, resources and published data on need and provision.
     • That DE issue urgent, child-rights-centred guidance on restraint and seclusion, and progress repeal of the current legal provision permitting force to maintain “good order and discipline.”[10]
     • That DE create a formal cross-departmental Health and Education framework, moving beyond meetings to joint planning, data-sharing, referral mechanisms, Allied Health Professional input, shared commissioning and clear accountability.
     • That DE strengthen transition and post-19 planning for young people with SEND, including effective cross-departmental pathways, alignment with Trust eligibility, social care planning where needed, and consideration of post-19 Health and Education plans.

Links to Appendices

Appendix 1: Memoranda and Papers from The Department for Education

View Memoranda and Papers supplied to the Committee by the Department Appendix 1: Memoranda and Papers from the Department for Education

Appendix 2: Memoranda and Papers from Others

View Memoranda and Papers supplied to the Committee from other individuals or organisations Appendix 2: Memoranda and Papers for Others

Appendix 3: Minutes of Proceedings

View Minutes of Proceedings of Committee meetings related to the report Appendix 3: Minutes of Proceedings

Appendix 4: Minutes of Evidence

View Minutes of Evidence from evidence sessions related to the report Appendix 4: Minutes of Evidence

Appendix 5: Written submissions

View written submissions received in relation to the report Appendix 5: Written Submissions

Appendix 6: Research Papers

View Research Papers produced by the Assembly’s Research and Information Service (RaISe) in relation to the report Appendix 6: Research Papers

Appendix 7: Other Documents relating to the report

View other documents in relation to the report Appendix 7: Other Documents relating to the report

Appendix 8: List of Witnesses that gave evidence to the Committee

Appendix 8: List of Witnesses that give evidence to the Committee

You may re-use this publication (not including images or logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Northern Ireland Assembly Licence.

Find out more about the Open Northern Ireland Assembly Licence.

This Report can be made available in a range of formats including large print, Braille etc. For more information please contact:

Committee for Education

Aoibhinn Treanor

Northern Ireland Assembly

Parliament Buildings

Ballymiscaw

Stormont

Belfast BT4 3XX

Telephone: 028 90 [Enter ext number]

Email: committee.education@niassembly.gov.uk

Twitter: @ [enter Committee twitter handle]