NDIA Accountability Project

Submission 207 — Institute of Special Educators — Inquiry into the Thriving Kids initiative

‹ PrevPage 1 of 5 · Source p. 1Next ›

Inquiry into the Thriving Kids Initiative by the House Standing Committee on Health Aged Care and Disability

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission to the above inquiry. This is an area of concern for the Institute of Special Educators (InSpEd) (https://www.insped.org.au/).

The Institute of Special Educators (InSpEd) aims to improve the quality of education for individuals with disability in Australia, including infants and young children with developmental delay, intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder. This work spans all settings and includes support to families and all professionals and carers providing services to individuals with disability and learning difficulty by offering up-to-date, evidence-based, information on approaches and specific intervention strategies. The Board of InSpEd is advised by a panel of experts with qualifications and experience in the education of people with disability and includes leading Australian researchers, including internationally recognised researchers in the field of early childhood intervention.

Our submission is focussing on the following terms of reference:

  • Evidence-based information and resources and program effectiveness
  • Domestic and international best practice
  • Gaps in workforce support and training required to deliver Thriving Kids
  • Mechanisms that would allow a seamless transition through mainstream systems for all children with mild to moderate support needs

InSpEd endorses the approach of providing services that focus on supports for individuals with disability in their everyday environments, which would involve supporting infants and young children and their families in familiar settings such as early childhood education and care. We agree that there are effective service models (e.g., STaR in NSW) that could provide blueprints for national service provisions. We also believe that supporting this approach will benefit children with more significant needs in early childhood settings.

Evidence-based information and program effectiveness

We endorse an approach that is evidence-based and draws on established best practices from Australia and overseas. At the same time, we have concerns that the existing approach of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) has led to a decline in the quality of support for Australian infants and young children with developmental disabilities and delays, and their families, over the last decade or so. This decline has been due, in part, to federal person-centred funding that has focussed on diagnoses rather than evidence-based interventions. In many cases, this has led to clinical approaches to the support of infants and young children rather than an inclusive, functional approach to both assessment of need and the development and implementation of evidence-based interventions in collaboration with early educators, family members and other relevant professionals. Quality of service provision has also been reduced by the failure on the part of governments to recognise the important role that early childhood special educators have played in the establishment of early intervention programs for infants and young children with developmental delays, autism, and cognitive disability due to genetic conditions.

Prior to the establishment of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) more than a decade ago, most community-based comprehensive early childhood intervention (ECI) programs supporting children with developmental disabilities and delays and their families were funded by state governments through block grants. This enabled services to provide family-centred support including evidence-based interventions with time built in to collaborate with early childhood education and care (ECEC) providers. These supports were provided by a team of professionals including early childhood special educators and allied health professionals such as physiotherapists, speech pathologists and occupational therapists, ideally using a transdisciplinary, key worker approach. With the move to a focus on medical diagnosis and service provision by allied health professionals, the valuable role of special educators with expertise in intervention in natural environments has been downgraded. Special educators are highly qualified practitioners who not only have skills and experience in delivering evidence-based practice but also, as educators, understand the difficulties faced by early childhood educators in providing quality education for the full range of children in their care.

One example of the effective use of special educators in early intervention is provided by the Special Teaching and Research (STaR) program https://www.star.org.au/, an Invest to Grow program funded by the Commonwealth Government in 2004, and currently funded for its operation in Sydney. This program is effective and evidence-based and was externally evaluated and deemed to be a promising practice by the Institute of Family Studies in 2008 (see attached from the Institute of Family Studies). STaR is a capacity building program where early childhood education and care (ECEC) educators are supported by qualified special educators to implement functional assessments in situ and to implement evidence-based strategies for supporting learning and development. STaR special educators also assist ECEC staff to include strategies suggested by allied health professionals such as speech pathologists, physiotherapists and occupational therapists in the naturally occurring activities and routines of the centre. The ECEC educators and special education professionals work closely with families and involve them in the development of the child’s individual education plan.

Domestic and international best practice

Guidelines for the implementation of best practice in early childhood intervention have been developed nationally (ECIA, 2016), with new guidelines in train, and internationally (e.g., Division for Early Childhood, 2014). The Australian guidelines have included the need for a family centred, inclusive and collaborative approach to early intervention support with an emphasis on evidence-based interventions and a focus on child outcomes. In recent years, a problem with the quality of staff recruited to early childhood intervention (ECI) roles has been identified, with a lack of adherence to best practice guidelines (Gavidia-Payne et al., 2024). Carlon et al. (2025a) found that the skills and experience required for advertised ECI roles in Australia did not reflect those needed for the implementation of Australian best practice guidelines. Delivering the Thriving Kids initiative will require a better qualified workforce if best practice is to be implemented nation wide.

Gaps in workforce support and training required to deliver Thriving Kids

Prior to the introduction of the NDIS, the early childhood intervention workforce supported a family-centred approach to early intervention, with interventions embedded into children’s daily routines and activities (Kemp, & Hayes, 2005), similar to that advocated for Thriving

Kids. However, even at that time, there was an acknowledgement that many found it difficult to implement the practices that they knew to be effective (Beamish & Bryer, 1999) and many of those employed in ECI roles in federally funded programs did not have recognised qualifications in the field of early childhood intervention or special education (Kemp & Hayes).

The advent of the NDIS has led to: (a) generic disability and early childhood organisations offering early childhood intervention services; (b) targeted early childhood intervention services offering supports to individuals with disability of all ages; and (c) private providers, generally allied health professionals, offering NDIS funded ECI services. This has resulted in a change in the qualifications and expertise of professionals providing support for infants and young children and their families. Gavidia-Payne et al. (2024) found that recruitment of ECI practitioners did not focus on the skills and experience required to provide quality support for young children with disabilities and that, consequently, families have not received the evidence-based information that they require. Zanuttini et al. (under review) found that the qualifications required for ECI roles in Australia were generally those of educators other than special educators (i.e., early childhood educators) and allied health professionals (specifically speech pathologists and occupational therapists) who often recommend unsupported practices (Paynter & Keen, 2015).

Unfortunately there are very few courses in Australia offering a named qualification in early childhood intervention that address the skills needed to work with young children with delay and/or disability. We have been able to identify only three at university level. Dedicated postgraduate courses for educators and allied health professionals are needed to prepare professionals to work in ECI roles. The content included in these courses should address the practices included in national and international best practice guidelines.

A recent review of the courses preparing professionals now commonly employed in ECI roles in Australia (Carlon, et al., 2025b) found that none of the areas of best practice (Family, Inclusion Teamwork, Universal Principles) were well addressed in eligible early childhood education, speech pathology, and occupational therapy courses at bachelor and postgraduate levels. The area of Inclusion appeared to be particularly poorly addressed in speech pathology and occupational therapy courses and the area of Universal Principles particularly poorly addressed in early childhood education courses. An important component of Universal Principles, ‘Skills in monitoring and review practices to ensure family and child outcomes are achieved’ only appeared to be addressed in one of 10 occupational therapy courses reviewed and none of the 10 speech therapy courses or 13 early childhood education courses. Preparation for professionals to work in early childhood intervention roles needs to be reviewed to provide professionals with the desired skills.

Mechanisms that would allow a seamless transition through mainstream systems

For young children with developmental delay/disability and autism, who are enrolled in ECEC centres, capacity building programs, such as the STaR program in NSW, can provide quality foundation supports. Capacity building programs enable ECEC and early school providers to implement effective support to the children in their care and to provide evidence-based information and support to their families.

Not only are such programs able to support mainstream staff to include infants and young children with disability/delay in their services and provide for these children’s developmental needs but program specialists can also support eductors to work with families and other professionals and can support transition to ECEC services and transition from ECEC services to school. The sad fact is that if these supports are not provided not only will many young children not meet their full potential but there will be additional pressures on families, ECEC systems and, subsequently, school systems.

Recommendations

  1. State governments need to ensure that evidence-based foundation supports are provided to infants and young children with disabilities and delays, including children with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability.
  2. Evidence-based foundation supports should be either provided or supported by qualified and experienced professionals who have completed a course in early childhood intervention that includes the evidence-based content identified in the research and embedded into the national and international best practice guidelines.
  3. Evidence-based foundation supports for infants and young children with developmental delay/disability and autism should be provided:
    • in naturalistic environments such as the family home and community settings, including ECEC settings
    • by professionals with appropriate education, or allied health qualifications who are able to work collaboratively with families and other professions to support the child’s learning and development
  4. Evidence-based foundation supports
    • should be tailored to meet the individual needs of the children and their families and not based on a diagnosis
    • should be supported by specialists with qualifications and expertise in early childhood intervention with skills and knowledge including:
      • knowledge of and ability to implement evidence-based interventions
      • ability to monitor child progress to ensure that services delivered are effective and produce the desired child outcomes
      • knowledge of and willingness to implement nationally and internationally recognised best practice guidelines in early childhood intervention.
  5. Quality postgraduate courses in early childhood intervention should be established in each state.
    • These should provide the additional skills required for allied health professionals and educators to work in ECI roles.
    • Standards for such courses need to be developed and adherence to these standards monitored.

References

Beamish, W., & Bryer, F., (1999). Practitioners and parents have their say about best practice: Early intervention in Queensland. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46, 261-278. Carlon, S., Zanutinni, J., Kemp, C., & Gavidia-Payne, S. (2025a). Australian early childhood intervention roles: Are they reflective of best practice and are the skills, knowledge, and experience sought by employers suitable? , Infants and Young Children, 38(2), 87-106. DOI: 10.1097/IYC.0000000000000288 Carlon, S., Kemp, C., Zanutinni, J., & Gavidia-Payne, S. (2025b). Personnel preparation for Australian early childhood intervention roles: Does it meet best practice standards? Advancing Comprehensive Early Childhood Intervention. 8th ISEI Early Childhood Intervention Conference, 2-5 September, 2025. Division for Early Childhood (2014). DEC recommended practices in early intervention/early childhood special education 2014. Retrieved from https://www.dec-sped.org/dec-recommended-practices. Early Childhood Intervention Australia (2016). National guidelines: Best practice in early childhood intervention. Retrieved from http://www.ecia.org.au/documents/item/161 Gavidia-Payne, S., Zanutinni, J., Carlon, S. & Kemp, C. (2024). Early childhood intervention under the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme: Characteristics and recruitment practices of service providers. Early Childhood Education Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-024-01759-w Kemp, C., & Hayes, A. (2005). Early intervention in Australia: The challenge of systems implementation. In M. J. Guralnick (Ed.), A developmental systems approach to early intervention: National and international perspectives (pp. 401-423). Baltimore: Brookes. Paynter, J. & Keen, D. (2015). Knowledge and use of intervention practices by community-based early intervention service providers. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1614-1623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2316-2 Zanuttini (submitted article). Best practice early childhood intervention: What do Australian providers look for in their practitioners?