Enhanced Support Model

• Department of Education: End to End Review of SEN (2024) 

The department, in partnership with the Education Authority (EA), initiated an End to End (E2E) Review of Special Educational Needs in February 2023. This review sought to obtain a greater understanding of the changing needs of our children and young people with SEN, provide a comprehensive response to the range of scrutiny report recommendations and design an eco-system that can make a real difference by improving outcomes in a more efficient and cost-effective manner.

• Northern Ireland Audit Office report on Special Educational Needs (2017)
• Northern Ireland Audit Office Impact Report on Special Educational Needs (2020)

This report highlighted concerns regarding the current approach to resourcing SEN, particularly the reliance on one‑to‑one classroom assistants. The PAC considers this model financially unsustainable, as current demand continues to exceed available funding. The report emphasises that there is currently no systematic evaluation of effectiveness of the support provided by classroom assistants.

The subsequent report in 2020 emphasised the need for a fundamental review of how support is allocated. 

• Public Accounts Committee Report on Impact Review of Special Educational Needs (2020)

The “Impact Review on Special Educational Needs” raised concerns about the effectiveness of adult assistance, particularly in post‑primary settings, noting that it may not always represent the most appropriate or beneficial form of support for pupils. The Committee emphasised the need for robust evaluation of how adult assistance influences children’s outcomes, and highlighted a gap in understanding the true impact of current deployment practices on pupils.

• Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) “Too Little, Too Late” Report (2020)

The NICCY Too Little, Too Late (2020) report highlighted widespread concern among all stakeholders regarding the current use of CAs. The review found that long‑term one‑to‑one support can unintentionally foster dependency, limiting children’s ability to navigate challenges independently and develop essential problem‑solving skills. 

• Ipsos Independent Review of SEN Services and Processes (2023)

The Ipsos Independent Review of SEN Services (2023) reported the need for a more agile and professionally driven approach to providing support within the classroom. 

The report highlighted a significant body of UK‑wide evidence that current patterns of CA deployment can negatively impact the educational outcomes of children with SEN.

There was strong agreement across stakeholders that the CA role should be professionalised to include higher qualification requirements, improved training and skills development, clearer career pathways and better pay. 

• Ulster University and Centre for Effective Services “A Profile of Classroom Assistants in Northern Ireland”

The Ulster University and Centre for Effective Services report further reinforces that the current model of relying heavily on one-to-one CA support is no longer sustainable or effective.

• Education Endowment Foundation - Special Education Needs in Mainstream Schools: Evidence Review

This review highlights several risks when Teaching Assistants (TAs) are placed constantly with one child including:

• Reduced teacher interaction - Pupils supported constantly by TA spend less time with qualified teachers, resulting in a lower quality of instruction.
• Untrained adults delivering instruction - If CAs deliver teaching without sufficient training or supervision, outcomes suffer. Studies show TAs “rarely receive adequate training and supervision”.
• Creation of dependency - Constant one to one adult presence can reduce independence and resilience, making pupils overly reliant on adult assistance.
   
• Education Endowment Foundation Guidance (2025) – Deployment of Teaching Assistants (TA) 

This report provides guidance on the best approach to the deployment of TAs. The guidance emphasises that long term one-to-one deployment (except where part of a specialist intervention) unintentionally hinder pupils’ access to high quality teaching, limiting the overall effectiveness of support.

• Department for Education (England): Use of Teaching Assistants in Schools – September 2024

Large scale observational studies (DISS project and related research) show that when pupils, particularly those with SEND, work predominantly with a TA rather than a teacher, their contact with the teacher decreases significantly.

This unintended separation from qualified teacher instruction weakens access to high quality teaching, the factor most strongly associated with improved academic attainment.

• Deployment and Impact of Support Staff (DISS) in Schools

The DISS project provides one of the most comprehensive analyses ever conducted on the impact of teaching assistants (TAs). Across Waves 1 and 2, using large‑scale quantitative data and in‑depth observations, the evidence consistently shows that a reliance on one‑to‑one or close TA support, as commonly deployed in schools, can unintentionally limit pupil progress.

• Inclusive Teaching: Securing Strong Educational Experiences and Outcomes for All Students (2025) 

The discussion report provides strong evidence that an over reliance on one-to-one support is problematic, unsustainable, and pedagogically less effective than strengthening whole class instruction and accessible design.

The authors emphasise that teachers should be empowered to apply their professional judgement to implement temporary supports and scaffolds within the main classroom environment, reflecting a graduated response. 

They also caution against premature separation into alternative learning tracks, stipulating that doing so can leave children feeling disconnected from their peers and limit their access to high‑quality, inclusive teaching.

• Scoping Review of the Role of Special Needs Assistants/Teaching Assistants/Paraprofessionals (2025)

This review outlines extensive international and Irish evidence which details how sustained one‑to‑one Special Needs Assistant (SNA)/TA support often produces unintended negative consequences, and that more flexible, inclusive models result in better academic, social, and independence outcomes for students.

The approach taken in both Denmark and Sweden to meet the needs of their children and young people with SEN is remarkably similar. The approach they take focuses on: 

• Needs‑based identification of support
• School‑led decision making, supported by national standards
• Access to multidisciplinary expertise (teachers, pedagogues, psychologists, therapists)
• Professionalisation and clear role development for support staff
• Reduced reliance on segregated provision through strengthened mainstream capability 

The approach taken in Finland to meet the needs of children and young people with SEN is grounded in a strongly inclusive philosophy and a tiered model of support. The approach they take focuses on: 

• Early, needs-based identification, delivered through a three-tiered system of general, intensified, and special support.
• School-led planning, using Individualised Learning Plans and flexible curriculum adaptation to tailor support.
• Access to multidisciplinary expertise, including special education teachers, psychologists, and other specialists working alongside classroom teachers.
• Highly trained staff, supported by a national commitment to teacher professionalism and continuous development.
• Reduced reliance on segregation, with an emphasis on maintaining pupils in mainstream groups wherever possible through in-class differentiated support. 

The approach taken in New Brunswick to meet the needs of children and young people with SEN is founded on a long-established, system-wide commitment to full inclusion. The approach they take focuses on: 

• Needs-based planning within mainstream settings, aligned with the province’s rights-driven inclusion legislation (Policy 322).
• School-led implementation, supported by a coherent provincial framework for inclusive education.
• Strong multidisciplinary collaboration, delivered through school-based support teams and specialist input.
• Capacity building for educators, emphasising professional learning and leadership for inclusion.
• Minimisation of segregated provision, with the expectation that pupils learn in age-appropriate local classes, supported as needed. 

The approach taken in Australia to support children and young people with SEN is structured around multi-tiered systems of support that strengthen mainstream capability. The approach they take focuses on:

• Needs-based, data-driven identification, through universal screening and ongoing progress monitoring embedded in RTI/MTSS frameworks.
• School-led decision-making, with teachers adapting evidence-based instruction and moving pupils through tiers based on response to intervention.
• Access to multidisciplinary and specialist expertise, supporting targeted interventions (e.g., literacy and numeracy specialists).
• Professionalisation and capability building, emphasising high-quality Tier 1 teaching and staff coaching to improve inclusive practice.
• Reduced reliance on segregated pathways, by strengthening universal and targeted supports so fewer pupils require intensive or specialist placements. 

In January 2026, EA conducted a survey of 100 schools across Northern Ireland that have implemented alternative support approaches. 67 schools responded to this survey, providing valuable insights into the drivers behind these changes and the challenges faced within the current system. The most common type of alternative approaches included CA hours to teacher hours, and implementing specialised CA. Other methods of provision used by schools included assistant and staffing models, inclusive and adaptive provision, and intervention and SEN teaching.

Context

We noticed a growing number of children with an increasingly diverse and complexity of need. This coincided with a time where student numbers in our area were increasing significantly and both of these placed additional pressures on our building and resources.

1. What We Do That is Different

We always had a band/pathway for young people who needed additional support, but we took the decision to create a nurture style experience as well as our existing provision. To support this, we moved departments to different places to create a dedicated SEN suite of rooms at the heart of the school.  We chose to do this as we believe this is important and we wanted the students to feel included and important. We now have a dedicated SEN office surrounded by 5 dedicated nurture style classrooms, all staffed by specialist SEN teachers. We also have a “cubby” in its own room to support sensory needs.

These classes have about 15 students, one teacher and up to four Classroom Assistants. EA have helped us to create a package for these classes to make sure we do not have too many adults in the room as most if not all the students have dedicated adult hours attached to their statements.

We have managed to recruit SEN specialists including primary trained teachers who deliver this pathway. They teach their class in a primary style environment for all general subjects. The students only move when they have their practical lessons which are taught by specialist teachers in specialist rooms. This means that all our nurture style classes have access to the full curriculum. To support their movement, their Classroom Assistants will move with them.

In Year 10 we try to change this model slightly to prepare them for their KS4 studies where they have a specific pathway including one day per week at SERC for Occupational Studies.

We now have a dedicated SEN team with a SENCo who is also an Assistant Principal. Her role is centred around SEN, and it includes P7 transition as this is a crucial point for young people and their families. This works well and we have developed excellent relationships with local primary schools who now recommend this option for their children when appropriate. We have assistant SENCos and all teachers who teach the nurture classes are in receipt of SEN allowances.

We have a number of students who need wheelchairs and have a couple more coming next year and to support this need we have been fortunate enough to change one of our toilet blocks into a dedicated accessible bathroom with hoist facilities etc. This is close to our SEN classrooms, and we have staff trained to support students with specific medical needs.

2. Why We Have Chosen to Do it This Way

We chose to do it this way to meet the needs in the community and to make sure it worked for the school. We haven’t gone down the SPIM classroom route as we do not need this additional physical resource although we could do with any additional funding available as we have received no direct additional funding for our model. The model we have created allows all students to be part of the school in all areas including practical subjects and all clubs as well as making sure that all students see our SEN provision as a central part of school life.

This model helps us to maintain control of our SEN provision and move students in and out of this area where appropriate.

We were promised three additional modular classrooms by a previous Education Minister, but this has taken over three years already and we are still awaiting final confirmation. These rooms are essential for us to meet the overall numbers as well as replace the classrooms we have adapted for our suite of SEN classrooms. There have been many contractual issues, and we are almost over the line with the funding required.  We are a PPP school which makes it extremely challenging to add additional buildings to our existing ones.

3. Impact on Pupils, Staff and Families

Our reputation with families of SEN students is now at the point where families want to come to this nurture style setting. The Primary Schools understand how our provision works and we are meeting the growing need in the area. We have invited local P7 teachers and Principals to see it in action and the Assembly Education Committee visited us and then held one of their meetings in our school.

I think that we now have an exceptional provision for these students who feel included and important and an integral part of our school community. When we made our old website about 11 years ago, we had 9 Classroom Assistants, and we now have over 70 and this reflects the changing requirements and needs of our community.  I am extremely proud of our CAs, and we could not run the school without them as they play a key role in so many different areas on top of their core roles and responsibilities.  We have CAs running clubs, accompanying trips and organising the choreography of our school shows. The additional numbers have created pressures in terms of space so we have made sure that they have the staff room as a base, but we do not have enough parking spaces!

Managing the additional number of staff is challenging and we always worry about finding new staff, but we always seem to manage it!  A part of this has been our SENCo, who is a member of the SLT and has a significantly reduced teaching timetable.  This means that, along with her team, she can make sure that things run as smoothly as possible at all times.

In terms of impact on young people, it is truly amazing. The care, the support and the love that they are shown from before they even start their journey is incredible and continues throughout their time here. The changes to their confidence and ability are visible and this goes alongside their results which are extremely impressive even considering their starting point. There are no ceilings for these students to make academic progress, and many have aspirations to remain in our school to 6th form and we do everything we can to accommodate these ambitions.

Context

In September, our P1/2 Social Communication Unit welcomed four new P1 children to replace four P3 children who were moving into the Senior SCU, and this sudden change significantly disrupted the existing class dynamic.

The impact on our P2 pupils was immediate and concerning, as many became upset, distressed, and showed noticeable regression in their learning. The overall environment quickly became unmanageable, with frequent incidents resulting in injuries to staff and other children, as well as daily damage to the classroom. This created a highly stressful situation for the pupils, staff, and parents alike. As the pressure intensified, both the class teacher and one classroom assistant went off sick due to stress. With no other viable option, we sought support from the Education Authority, and the addition of an extra teacher, while the new P1 pupils undergo reassessment for more suitable placements, has helped to relieve pressure on everyone involved.

1. What We Do That is Different

We made the decision to split the P1 and P2 children into separate learning spaces, supported by an additional teacher. Initially, both teachers worked together within one classroom; however, due to the level of challenging behaviours from the P1 children, this still made effective teaching difficult. For the remainder of the school year, we separated the two cohorts so they could be taught at appropriate levels.

The P1 group now follows a more play-based approach, with shorter, simpler tasks, structured routines, and increased use of outdoor learning. Meanwhile, the P2 group is taught in a calmer, more focused environment where they can access learning without disruption. The children are now catching-up on missed learning and settling to tasks because there is no disruption within the classroom.

2. Why We Have Chosen to Do it This Way

 We observed that the needs of the P1 children, particularly their readiness for structured tasks, were significantly impacting the P2 group. The classroom environment had become unsettled, and we saw P2 children beginning to regress, becoming increasingly stressed and disengaged.

Parents also reported that their children were coming home distressed on a daily basis, which was affecting family life. While waiting for educational psychologists to carry out emergency annual reviews for the P1 children, we requested additional staffing to better support the class.

When it became clear that a shared classroom was still not meeting the needs of either group, we decided to separate them to reduce stress, provide appropriate learning experiences, and restore a positive classroom environment.

3. Impact on Pupils, Staff and Families 

The impact has been highly positive for both children and staff.

For the P2 children:

• They are now settled, happy, and enjoying school.
• They are able to catch up on previously missed learning.
• All are achieving full marks in weekly spelling tests, despite not previously completing them.
• Two children have stopped stimming during the school day.
• One child who previously did not eat in school is now eating well.
• They are communicating more, expressing their feelings, and forming friendships.
• Situations are de-escalated more quickly due to reduced stress levels.

For families:

• Parents have reported a significant improvement in their children’s wellbeing.
• Children who were previously distressed are now going home happy and talking positively about their day.
• Home life has improved as a result.

For staff:

• Staff are better able to teach effectively and meet individual needs.
• The learning environment is calmer and more manageable.
• Both P1 and P2 groups are now accessing learning at an appropriate level, with the P1 children engaging in structured play-based activities and the P2 children benefiting from focused teaching.

Summary

Overall, this change has allowed both cohorts to thrive in ways that were not possible within a shared classroom environment.

Context

Our school continues to develop support and increased provision for a growing cohort of children with highly complex learning, medical, physical, and behavioural needs. These include severe anxiety-driven and control-seeking behaviours, significant emotional dysregulation, communication disorders, and complex medical conditions-some of which present potential life‑threatening risks. With no alternative placements currently available, the school continues to endeavour to provide the safest and most appropriate learning environment possible within our existing capacity.

To meet these exceptional needs, we have developed a targeted Stage 3 intervention model that incorporates specialist training, therapeutic approaches, enhanced emotional support, and personalised learning pathways.

1. What We Do That is Different

Individualised and Intensive Support Plans

We design and deliver bespoke support packages that go beyond standard SEND provision, including:

• Individualised Stage 3 plans tailored to each pupil’s cognitive, communication, sensory, medical, and emotional profile
• Targeted 1:1 sessions for literacy, regulation, communication, and behaviour
• Small group learning, focusing on readiness-to-learn, social interaction, and functional skills
• Therapeutic activities including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech and language therapy
• Sensory‑based strategies, such as sensory diets, circuits, and regulation routines

Skilled, Mirrored Intervention Delivery

• We provide direct specialist modelling to staff:
• SEN specialists run mirrored sessions so assistants can observe, practice, and implement strategies confidently
• Staff receive professional learning opportunities and coaching in intervention delivery to ensure consistency, fidelity, and sustainability
• Approaches are aligned across classroom, withdrawal rooms, playground, and home

Extensive Specialist Staff Training

To maintain safety and quality of provision, we work in partnership with a range of external providers to access a broad range of highly specialised professional training, including:

• TESSA training
• Basic First Aid and AED training
• Tracheostomy care training
• Connection & Caring training
• ASD Tier 1 training
• SSST training
• Theraplay
• LEGO Therapy
• Assistants Foundation for Behaviour

This ensures staff are fully equipped to manage medical procedures, complex behaviours, sensory regulation, and therapeutic interventions safely and confidently.

Emotional Wellbeing and Counselling Support

We have employed a school counsellor who:

• Provides a safe, confidential space for children with SEWB and anxiety needs
• Supports emotional literacy, self-regulation, trauma-informed practice, and early mental health intervention

Maximising the Physical Environment for Safety and Inclusion

Although our current building is not designed for pupils with advanced medical and accessibility requirements, we:

• Repurpose every available space for therapeutic and learning purposes
• Adapt classrooms for sensory, behavioural, and medical needs where possible
• Deploy staff expertise strategically to ensure maximum impact and support

Despite these efforts, the complexity of needs now exceeds what our current facilities can safely accommodate, highlighting the urgent requirement for bespoke, specialist learning spaces. We are currently working with DE and EA to deliver these.

2. Why We Have Chosen to Do it This Way. 

Complexity of Need Requires Specialist Approaches

Many of the pupils we support present with challenges that could not be addressed through standard teaching or traditional Stage 3 provision. The combination of:

• medical equipment,
• sensory dysregulation,
• severe anxiety and behaviour,
• high communication needs, and
• physical vulnerabilities
  necessitates a therapeutic, multi‑professional model.

Safety and Risk Management

Due to the potential for medical emergencies and significant behavioural incidents, staff required and undertook:

• highly specialised clinical training
• predictable routines and structured environments
• the capacity to implement medical protocols with confidence

Operating without such measures would compromise pupil safety and wellbeing.

Evidence-Based, Trauma-Informed Practice

Interventions such as Theraplay, sensory regulation, counselling, and OT-informed supports are grounded in well‑researched approaches that improve emotional regulation, attachment, engagement, and learning readiness.

Ensuring Equity and Inclusion

With no alternative placements available, it was our responsibility to:

• maintain access to education,
• reduce exclusion and withdrawal,
• protect wellbeing, and
• ensure pupils receive an entitlement that meets their complex needs.

Our approach ensures that pupils who might otherwise face severe barriers to education can remain included, supported, and safe.

3. Impact on Pupils, Staff and Families  

Impact on Pupils

Increased Emotional Regulation and Stability

Theraplay, sensory routines, and counselling have reduced:

• anxiety-driven behaviours
• dysregulation episodes
• avoidance and withdrawal from learning

Pupils now demonstrate improved readiness to learn and greater confidence working alongside peers.

Enhanced Communication and Interaction

Speech and Language programmes and strategies, and visually-supported communication have improved:

• expressive and receptive language
• social interaction
• understanding of routines, expectations, and transitions

Improved Safety and Reduced Medical Risk

Specialised staff training ensures:

• correct use of medical equipment
• faster and safer responses to medical needs
• reduced risk of incidents escalating

Better Academic Engagement and Progress

Individualised plans and small‑group sessions have led to:

• improved concentration
• more consistent participation
• measurable progress in literacy, numeracy, and functional skills

Impact on Staff

Increased Confidence and Skill Level as well as Qualifications

Staff now feel significantly more prepared to:

• support complex medical needs
• manage high-level behavioural challenges
• deliver therapeutic programmes

This has strengthened whole school capacity and reduced reliance on external professionals.

More Consistent, High-Quality Support

Mirrored intervention sessions ensure all staff:

• use strategies accurately and confidently
• provide consistent responses across the school day
• maintain fidelity to therapeutic models

Improved Teamwork and Professional Resilience

The collaborative nature of the interventions—combined with specialist training—has:

• strengthened staff cohesion
• improved problem-solving and a more solution-focussed outlook
• supported emotional resilience

Summary 

Our Stage 3 SEN provision is unique in its depth, intensity, and safety-focused design. Through personalised plans, therapeutic interventions, staff professional learning, emotional wellbeing support, and a whole‑school consistent approach, we have created a system capable of meeting extremely complex and high‑risk needs. This has led to improvements in pupil safety, wellbeing, emotional regulation, communication, and academic engagement, while also developing staff expertise and capacity.

The next essential step is securing enhanced specialist support and dedicated, fit‑for‑purpose learning spaces from our Nursery right through the school, that can safely accommodate the increasing medical, behavioural, and accessibility needs of our pupils.

Context 

Our school has introduced a highly effective alternative model of SEN support, which has significantly strengthened the provision for pupils across all stages.

1. What We Do That is Different

A key element of this model is the creation of six Connect classes—smaller, more nurturing mainstream groups within Key Stage 3. These classes allow us to provide targeted support and a calmer learning environment. To fund the specialist teachers required, we strategically reallocated classroom assistant hours.

We have also reinvested classroom assistant hours to appoint a range of specialist staff, including:

• 1 full‑time Literacy Intervention Teacher
• 1 full‑time Numeracy Intervention Teacher
• 1 full‑time Nurture Teacher
• 1 Student Wellbeing Lead

In addition, we have developed a skilled team of classroom assistants trained in Thinking Reading, who now deliver both one‑to‑one and small‑group reading interventions.

We also have four SPSCs, collectively known as The Base. Pupils from The Base integrate into Connect classes when it is purposeful and meaningful to do so. This creates a graduated pathway toward full participation in the mainstream environment. The model offers flexibility and enhanced scaffolding, ensuring that pupils receive the right support, at the right time, in the right place, from the right people.

2. Why We Have Chosen to Do it This Way

This model was implemented in response to the rapid increase in number and complexity of pupils with statements—now totalling 190—while also strengthening support for pupils at Stages 1 and 2 of the Code of Practice and those who are pre‑code. The SEN team is playing a central role in building capacity across the entire teaching and CA workforce, ensuring that inclusive practice is embedded school‑wide.

3. Impact on Pupils, Staff and Families

Feedback from both parents and pupils has been overwhelmingly positive, and the model is widely recognised within the school and wider community as highly successful.

Background

My son is fifteen. He is funny, sharp, deeply empathetic, and passionate about history. He notices things other people miss. He makes people around him laugh. He is, in every sense, a real and remarkable person.  For years, that boy was almost invisible. What consumed us, and what defined him to almost every professional we encountered, was the fact that he could not go to school. He became a problem to be solved. There was play therapy, an autism diagnosis, CAMHS referrals, assessments, and meetings. Each one came with good intentions, and each one looked at what was wrong with him rather than what he needed. What he needed, it turned out, was not complicated. He needed to feel safe.  Larne High School understood that. Everything else followed from there.  My son received his autism diagnosis in primary school. That diagnosis came and went without any connection to additional support, without a referral pathway, and without anyone suggesting that a Statement of Educational Needs might be something we should explore. We did not know what a Statement was, what it could provide, or that we might need one. We were simply left to get on with it. We got through primary school, but anxiety around attending became a significant issue as he moved into post-primary, and by the time we understood the support that should have been available to us and began that process, things had already deteriorated significantly.

After the Christmas holidays of Year 8, his attendance collapsed. By Easter he was deeply depressed, had completely retreated inside himself, and was in a very dark place, questioning the point of continuing. We withdrew him from school entirely. He was not in school for the rest of Year 8 or for most of Year 9. He was in complete burnout. We were in limbo, unsure how or whether he would ever return to school.

How We Found Larne High School

When his Statement of Educational Needs was finally in place, it included the option of access to an autism unit. His current school did not have that capacity, and we were advised to consider a transfer. A friend mentioned that Larne High School had a reputation for being flexible and genuinely supportive with children who had additional needs. Acting on that, I made an appointment to meet the SENCO.

I want to be honest: I went to that meeting expecting nothing. After more than a year out of school, I had almost no belief that my son would ever attend regularly again. I just needed him to be registered somewhere.

The First Visit

We arrived just as assembly was ending. The foyer was busy and noisy. My son stood with his face almost against the wall, visibly shaking. I thought for a moment we should just leave.

When the SENCO appeared, everything changed. She did not rush to solutions or judge the past. She was warm, welcoming, and immediately reassuring, and there was none of the sense that they would be doing us a favour by taking him. The tone she set from that first moment was: you are very welcome here, how can we help? She spoke directly to my son, put him at ease, and made clear that nothing would be forced, nothing would happen without his say-so, and that everything would go at his pace. She listened, really listened, and in that moment we felt seen, heard and safe. Her approach set the tone for everything that followed.

While the autism unit was named in his Statement, after speaking with us she felt she might have another option that would be a better fit for him: the school's Emotional Wellbeing Room.

The Wellbeing Room: A Different Model

The key to this model is something that, to my knowledge, very few schools in Northern Ireland are doing. Larne High School is able to convert the classroom assistant hours allocated through a child's Statement of Educational Needs into full-time teaching hours within the Wellbeing Room. This means a fully qualified teacher is present in that space, working with children at their own pace, through the same curriculum as their year group.

This is not a withdrawal unit. It is not a holding space. It is a genuine learning environment designed to allow children to build trust and stability before they are ready to access mainstream classes.

Getting Started: Relationships Before Everything Else

My son joined the school in May. For those first weeks, there was no academic focus at all. He was invited in on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, but only if he felt well enough to come. He wore navy joggers and a hoodie rather than full uniform, matching the school colours so he felt like he belonged without the pressure of formal dress.

He spent those first weeks in the Wellbeing Room getting to know a small, consistent team of staff, playing Xbox, making his own drinks and snacks in the small kitchen, and slowly beginning to feel safe. No one ever pressured him to stay longer or do more. The staff there genuinely cared about him, earned his trust, and made school feel safe again. Slowly, school became somewhere he did not dread. Somewhere he could breathe.

There was no pressure to move straight into mainstream classes. There was never shame, punishment, or any sense of you should be doing more. Only patience and belief in him.

By the time September came, there was something we had not had in a very long time: hope.

Building Confidence and Returning to Learning

In September he began accessing maths and English in the Wellbeing Room, working through the same content as his year group but at a pace that suited him. He continued on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday pattern for the full year. Alongside the academic work, the classroom assistant supporting him noticed when he needed movement or a reset and offered breaks without fuss, whether that was a short game of football, a walk, or simply a chance to decompress. That attunement made school manageable again.

I will be honest: I worried at times that he was falling behind. But I kept coming back to what I could see in front of me. His mental health was improving, his confidence was growing, and he was going to school. I chose to trust the process.

One of the most significant things that happened that year was the work Empower to Transform did with him and a small group of other young people. They are a youth work charity who came into the school and worked with the children in a completely different way, making learning feel engaging and relevant. My son went on his first ever school trip in post-primary, a visit to the Peace Walls in Belfast to learn about the Troubles. He was captivated. It opened something up in him.

His History teacher also reached out proactively during this year, simply to learn about him and make him feel welcome before he had ever set foot in her classroom. That kindness, and her genuine interest in him as a person, meant that History became his favourite subject. He wanted to try for her, because he felt valued by her.

The Return to Mainstream Classes

When he began accessing mainstream classes the following September, I was nervous it would be too much too soon. But because the foundations were so solid, because there was a base in the Wellbeing Room he could always return to, it worked. The Wellbeing Room remained his anchor, giving him the freedom to join lessons when he felt able, or step back when he needed to. He goes out to History, RE, Science, English, and Maths without a classroom assistant, independently. He walks into those rooms himself.

His History teacher has been exceptional throughout. His RE class, with its smaller and more inclusive environment, also helped him feel settled and confident. Every teacher he has encountered has gone out of their way to make him feel genuinely part of the school.

He recently sat his first GCSE Maths paper. He had not done formal Maths since primary school and expected to do very badly. He got top marks. He could not believe it. Neither could I. It showed something important: the gaps in his attendance had not defined what he was capable of. He had not fallen as far behind as either of us feared.

Attendance Is Not the Whole Picture

My son attends until lunchtime at the longest. If you looked only at his attendance figures, it would look like he was failing. He is not failing. He is thriving. Attendance numbers do not capture mental health, confidence, reconnection with learning, or academic progress. They are one factor among many, and when a child has EBSNA, treating attendance as the primary measure can actively prevent the approaches that actually work.

What Has Made the Difference

At the heart of everything Larne High School has done is relationships. Relationships came first, before any expectation around learning or attendance. That is not a soft or incidental thing. It is the foundation on which everything else has been built. What Larne did was more than accommodate my son. They helped him reconnect with learning, with other people, and with himself.

That culture does not happen by accident. It is nurtured. Dr Reid, the headmaster, has created a school that is warm, calm, and welcoming for all children, and that ethos runs through every interaction we have had there. It comes from the top, and it shows at every level, from the SENCO to the classroom assistants to the subject teachers. Everyone has asked the same question: what does this child need? Are they happy? That question has come first, consistently.

The flexibility of the model has been essential. But flexibility alone is not enough. What Larne has done is find a way to create real flexibility within a system that increasingly does not allow for it. They found a way to make the Statement work differently. That took creativity, commitment, and a leadership culture that supports staff to think outside the box. This is what a relationship-first, child-centred approach can achieve.

I want to recognise the SENCO and SEN staff specifically. They are the people at the coalface, trying to find human solutions inside a system that grows more rigid. They deserve recognition, support, and the resources to keep doing what they do.

A Broader Point for the Education Authority

I want to close with something that goes beyond my son's story, because I think it is relevant to how the EA considers this model.

The approach at Larne works because Statement hours have been repurposed into something more flexible and more effective. But there are many children with EBSNA across Northern Ireland who cannot yet get through the school door at all. Those children often have Statement hours sitting unused in a school they are unable to attend. No work is being sent home. No support is reaching them. They are in limbo, exactly where my son was for a year and a half.

If Larne can repurpose those hours within school, the same logic could apply to children who are not yet in school. Converting unused Statement hours into home tuition, remote teaching, or outreach support could have made an enormous difference to my son during that period of absence. It could make a difference to many children right now.

I hope the EA will look at what Larne High School has built not just as a model for within-school support, but as a starting point for thinking differently about how Statement provision can reach children wherever they are.

Key Learnings: What Other Schools Can Take From This

1. Leadership and culture start at the top

A child-centred, needs-led philosophy only works when it is modelled from the very top. At Larne High School, the Headmaster and leadership team champion this approach, and it shows at every level, including reception and administrative staff. Whole-school consistency in warmth, flexibility and compassion is not incidental. It is essential.

2. The SENCO sets the first foundation of trust

The first interaction a family has with a school can determine everything that follows. A SENCO who listens, collaborates, and co-designs support with families rather than presenting ready-made solutions sets a powerful tone for the entire school journey.

3. A dedicated wellbeing space with consistent, skilled staff

A safe, consistent base staffed by one or two familiar adults provides the stability and trust that children with EBSNA need. It allows flexible reintegration while ensuring the child always has somewhere secure to return to. The repurposing of Statement classroom assistant hours into qualified teaching hours within this space is a model that other schools could explore.

4. Relationships before academics

Building trust and emotional safety must come before attendance targets or academic catch-up. When a child feels connected, understood, and genuinely welcomed, motivation to learn follows naturally. Reversing this order rarely works.

5. Flexible, student-led reintegration

Progression into mainstream classes should be gradual and entirely at the student’s pace. A no-pressure approach, with a secure base always available, reduces anxiety and increases long-term success. Shame, urgency, and attendance targets during this phase are counterproductive.

6. Teachers who take time to know the student make a lasting impact

A teacher who shows genuine interest, adapts their expectations, and creates an inclusive atmosphere can unlock engagement that no intervention programme can replicate. One caring teacher can be the reason a child wants to attend. This costs nothing except intention.

7. Small, inclusive class environments help rebuild confidence

Where possible, smaller groups, gentle encouragement, and discussion-based learning help students feel valued and able to participate. The transition from a small, safe space to a mainstream classroom is significantly easier when some classes offer a middle ground.

8. Holistic experiences rebuild a positive association with school

Trips, small group projects, and activities that feel relevant and enjoyable help children associate school with belonging and success rather than stress and failure. For a child who has been out of school for a long time, a first school trip is not a small thing. It is a milestone.

This is a long-term plan to deliver better outcomes for children and young people with special educational needs (SEN). It is part of the Department of Education's SEN reform agenda.

The current classroom support model does not meet the needs of the child in the best way possible and is under intense strain.

Under the reforms, schools will have greater flexibility and freedom to tailor support to the individual needs of children. They can move away from the current "one size fits all" model with its over reliance on one-to-one support for children. This will mean wider and deeper support where appropriate e.g. small group learning sessions, use of different teaching methods, access to more specialist educational and health professional input. 

This will be a phased programme – and plans will evolve in the coming years.

The public consultation, running for eight weeks from 24/03/2026, will give everyone the opportunity to have their say.

Subject to the outcome of the public consultation, the next planned milestone will be June /July 2026 when a finalised classroom support model will be published, and new statutory assessment and statement guidance issued.

Statements will in future be focussed on the individual needs of each child. In order to ensure on the ground flexible decisions can be made by schools, statements will not be overly prescriptive in terms of classroom support options.

In the first phase of implementation from September 2026, the EA will work with around 150 mainstream schools who are already adopting alternative models of support to implement the new classroom support model. The EA will also work with the 40 Special Schools in NI.

The new model will then be rolled out to different parts of NI in the years ahead.

Every child who needs one-to-one support will continue to receive it. The needs of our children and young people are paramount. This reform gives schools more flexibility to provide the most effective and appropriate support in each case.

Any changes will be introduced carefully and sensitively, through the established annual review process for each child's SEN provision.

There are concerns that a blanket one-to-one model of support does not meet the needs of the child in the best way possible and can unintentionally and unnecessarily isolate some children.  When a young person is consistently paired through one-to-one support, they may miss opportunities to engage and interact with their teacher and classmates, participate in group activities and develop vital skills including skills to prepare for adult life.

This isolation can often exacerbate feelings of difference and exclusion.

This is not about cutting costs, it is about delivering better outcomes for children and young people. 

The current system is at breaking point and cannot keep up with the increasing levels of need. We need a model that is delivering the best possible support for our children and young people and one that can keep up with the year on year rising demand. What we currently have does not do this and is not sustainable.

Even if there were unlimited resources, the current classroom support model would need to be changed. Of course, we do not have unlimited funding, and we need to ensure that we use available resources in the most effective way.

The priority must be to provide the right support in the right place at the right time.

Classroom assistants play an essential role in schools right across NI. There would not be an education system without them. Many children would not be able to attend school.

Redundancies are not planned or expected in this reform.

We want to retain the skills and experience that currently exist and build on them.

It is the case that the levels of growth in the classroom assistant workforce in recent years cannot be achieved in the years ahead. Many schools are already struggling to fill new posts based on additional one-to-one roles.

The new enhanced model will allow us to use the excellent classroom assistant workforce we currently have in the best possible way and recognise the skills and experience they have. It will also provide classroom assistants with opportunities for more specialist roles, appropriately rewarded.

Rollout of the model has been linked to the Health and Social Care Trust areas to align with the already existing boundaries of our SEND Local IMPACT Teams. Our Educational Psychology Service has also restructured to align with the Trust areas. Aligning the rollout of the Enhanced Support Model to the Trust areas ensures services for children and young people are better joined up across the Education Authority as a whole, and that we can work closely with Health & Social Care professionals.  

EA’s Local IMPACT Teams were established in September 2025. They brought together staff and expertise from eight services into Local IMPACT Teams capable of supporting the needs of children and young people with SEN through a single referral.

The creation of the Local IMPACT Teams did not remove the expertise or staff from the previous eight services. Rather, it removed the silos that previously existed and provides a service that wraps around the child and focusses on the needs of the child.

EA strongly believes that support for children and young people should be focussed on need, rather than on diagnoses or titles of teams. SEN support services prior to the Local IMPACT Teams did not foster cooperative support for children and young people across teams, and the eight services were transformed into one single service. This significantly reduced the level of bureaucracy that schools faced (with over 30 different phone numbers, multiple different forms and so on), enabling a single referral and targeted support centred around needs of the child.

EA’s Local IMPACT Teams also removed the requirement for assessment by an educational psychologist before a referral could be made. This means schools who want to refer a child can do so.

The current position is not a consequence of the SEN reforms. The simple reality is that, like all public services, the education sector faces acute financial pressures, and the Local IMPACT are not currently resourced to meet the demands placed upon them. This was equally true of the previous eight services they replaced, and any perceived deterioration in the ability to meet demand since September is a consequence of the sustained increase in demand against a fixed resource position, rather than the change. 

EA recognises that schools are facing enormous pressures. There has been a huge rise in the number of children who are receiving a statement of SEN, whilst there have been similar increases in the number of children and young people at stages one and two of the Code of Practice. 

Schools currently have limited resources to support these needs, and the current system of providing SEN support is too rigid in how this resource is allocated. As SEN resourcing in schools is linked predominantly to the statements of children with SEN, there are often significant gaps, particularly in early years, and P1-P3. At the same time, some schools have large numbers of classroom assistants, allocated to provide individual support for children with a statement of SEN in older year groups. 

We have seen how allowing schools to have greater flexibility in how they respond to the unique needs of their school population can enable them to more effectively manage the needs of children and young people in their school who have SEN. This is not a shifting of responsibility away from EA and onto schools; rather it represents the empowering of schools to better manage the pressures they are facing, to seek to ensure that children and young people receive the support required to meet their needs.

SEN transformation will see improved outcomes for children and young people by identifying their individual needs and responding to them more quickly. This will include closer collaboration with the health service and other professionals; however this can only be achieved through transforming the way in which SEN support is currently delivered. 

SEN transformation will also improve the ability to find suitable placements by improving capacity in the system and supporting school leaders and teachers to meet the needs of all pupils in their schools.

EA is an operational non-Departmental body, which delivers in line with Departmental policies. EA is, in line with Departmental policies, using aspects of the draft Code of Practice in its work. There has been significant engagement with children and young people, parents and others to develop the draft Code of Practice and ensure that it meets the needs of children and young people with SEN.

SEN transformation is about providing best support and interventions for children and young people. How this is delivered is not provided in legislation or the (draft) Code of Practice. SEN provision by EA follows, and will continue to follow, all current and future statutory requirements. 

The Enhanced Support Model is currently subject to public consultation. This is an opportunity for the public to engage on how support for children and young people with a statement of SEN are supported going forward. It is disappointing that the CLC letter was published prior to any engagement with the EA about their concerns – particularly as it contains some inaccuracies. We strongly believe that we would have been able to allay some of these concerns if we had been given the opportunity to do so. 

School staff work with children and young people daily. School staff are best placed to identify needs in children and young people and, if appropriate, refer the child or young person for further intervention.

The Graduated Response Framework does not shift responsibility towards schools. Rather it provides a structured approach to support to ensure that all parts of the education system provide the appropriate support at the appropriate level.

EA recognises the pressures that schools are currently facing in meeting the needs of a rising number of pupils who are presenting with SEN. The reality is that the current approach simply does not work as well as any of us would want it to, and it will only be possible to address these pressures through transforming the way in which SEN provision is delivered. 

This point within the CLC letter adds to the case for reform, as opposed to presenting a valid reason for resisting it. While it is widely accepted that SEN support services do not provide value for money or optimal outcomes for children and young people, this is simply not a question of resourcing. It is only by transforming EA’s SEN support system that we will be able to improve outcomes for all. 

Where the statutory threshold is met a statutory assessment is progressed. While it is a fact that a significant number of tribunal cases relating to decisions not to progress with statutory assessments are conceded, in the vast majority of cases this is due to the presentationof new information later in the appeal process. Had such information been made available at the time of the initial decision, it would have resulted in a different decision. EA can only take decisions based on the information presented to it. From January to March 2026, 363 appeals were made to tribunal (relating to both refusals to assess and outcomes of assessments). 127 cases were conceded, with all conceded due to further information being made available to us (112 with additional information from schools and 15 with additional information from other sources).

EA is not delegating any legal duties to schools that belong to EA. 

EA’s Enhanced Support Model does not change the requirements, processes or procedures relating to the statutory assessment process. It does not change the rights of children and young people to receive a statement or the rights when they have a statement. It does not change the process around appeals to Tribunal.

The requirement in legislation is to provide a statement that specifies and quantifies the support that should be available to the child, and to provide the placement of the child. The Enhanced Support Model does not change this, and statements will continue to specify and quantify support for the child or young person.

EA’s Enhanced Support Model seeks to improve outcomes for children and young people by identifying the individual needs and ensuring timely access to the right mix of support, delivered by a skilled and confident workforce. 

Relevant legislation and guidance for SEN can be found under our Legislation and Guidance section.

Resources for SEN support, both for those at stage 2 (pre-statement) and those at stage 3 (statement), are provided by EA. EA is the employing authority for all SEN support staff and resources are provided to schools from EA to deliver SEN support.

EA’s Enhanced Support Model does not change the resource allocation approach, nor does it change EA’s role, responsibilities or duties. 

More importantly, the Enhanced Support Model will enable greater flexibility for schools to ensure that resources are in place to enable the right support, at the right time for children and young people with SEN in their schools.

EA’s Enhanced Support Model focusses on children and young people with SEN. Currently, outcomes for children and young people with SEN in Northern Ireland are sub-optimal. Every day we do not change, we accept poorer outcomes. 

The public consultation seeks the public’s view on a new model for support for children and young people with SEN. Only when this model has been agreed upon can consultation with staff, unions and others take place. Anything else would be assuming an outcome of a public consultation which would be wrong both substantively (as we want to hear the views of the public) and procedurally (as we would assume the outcomes).

It is on the record that we want to improve the role of the classroom assistant. We want to use the very dedicated and skilled workforce better, with enhanced training offers, career pathways, specialisation and a reward that matches the important work that is done.

To assist in this work, EA is supporting work commissioned by the Department of Education from the Ulster University to review the Classroom Assistant Workforce model.

The reforms will be introduced in phases over a number of years, beginning this September with schools that are already adopting innovative approaches to classroom support. Implementation will be developed over the following years, informed by feedback from schools and families. Any suggestion that the reforms will be fully implemented by September 2026 is both incorrect and misleading. 

The current public consultation is in line with EA’s Equality Scheme and is not shortened. Section 3.10 of EA’s Equality Scheme notes that the standard period for an EA consultation is eight weeks. 

The scheme can be found under Equality Scheme.

Many engagement events have been planned, and a conference was held on 16 April with over 400 people attending in person, with the morning session also available online. In addition, 10 online and 23 in-person events are being held between 20 April and 7 May 2026.

It is EA’s assessment that the Enhanced Support Model provides improved outcomes for section 75 protected groups. A full Equality Impact Assessment can be found under Consultations. The public consultation seeks views on the Equality Impact Assessment, and we would welcome comments on the Assessment.

Currently children and young people with SEN do not receive the support they need when they need it. This means that, under the current system, we are effectively accepting that outcomes for children and young people with SEN are poorer than those of their peers. 

Every day we not transform, we accept this injustice for children and young people with SEN – this is wholly unacceptable. We must therefore transform to ensure those that need out help and support the most receive it when and where they need it.