19 Prospect Hill Road
(Private Bag 55)
Camberwell VIC 3124
Australia
+61 3 9277 5555
Committee Secretariat
House Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Disability
PO Box 6021
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Phone: +61 2 6277 4145
Health.Reps@aph.gov.au
20 October 2025
Submission: Inquiry into the Thriving Kids initiative
The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) is delighted to contribute this submission to the inquiry into the Thriving Kids initiative, which aligns closely with our organisational mission to create and share evidence-informed insights and tools to improve learning for all. ACER is an independent not-for-profit organisation with 9 offices worldwide and 95 years of experience supporting diverse government and non-government clients to improve educational outcomes at all levels.
We note that the Thriving Kids initiative seeks to improve identification and support for children up to 8 years with mild to moderate developmental concerns and disability, including children with autism, by enhancing existing mainstream and community services in settings to which families and children are already connected. Addressing a subset of the Terms of Reference, our submission specifically focuses on supports that can be provided through schools and early childhood education services. We acknowledge the relationship between the Thriving Kids initiative and recommendations from the 2023 NDIS review for improved equity and inclusion through foundational supports for children with disability, developmental delay or concerns and their families within mainstream education and related services.
Schools and early childhood education services are critical sites for effective prevention and early intervention. For children up to 8 years with developmental delay or disability, the provision of early intervention and foundational supports in natural settings such as mainstream early childhood education and schools allows these to be embedded within daily routines and learning experiences (Moore et al., 2025; Trembath & Wicks, 2025). Providing support in natural rather than clinical settings enables children to learn and apply new skills in personally meaningful ways. It also fosters inclusive communities as children can access the support they need while being educated alongside their age peers.
In this submission, we highlight an evidence-informed framework into which foundational supports should be embedded and emphasise the need to build workforce capability to enact this kind of approach. Prioritising evidence-based support and intervention frameworks and providing targeted support to build workforce capability is essential to the success of the Thriving Kids initiative.
A multi-tiered, sitewide approach to support and intervention
Evidence from international research and multiple reviews highlights that effective provision for children with mild to moderate support needs within mainstream education settings relies on a highly coordinated and responsive system of prevention, targeted support, and intensive intervention. Grounded in prevention logic and a child-centred approach, a general ‘Multi-tiered System of Supports’ (MTSS) framework is reflected across multiple recent Australian reviews and guidelines, including:
- 2025 National best practice framework for early childhood intervention (for Australian Government Department of Social Services)
- The ECIA National guidelines for best practice in early childhood intervention (Early Childhood Intervention Australia)
- 2025 National framework for assessing children’s functional strengths and support needs in Australia (Autism CRC)
- 2023 Review of Inclusion Support Program (for Australian Government Department of Education)
- 2023 Independent review into the National Disability Insurance Scheme (for Australian Government Department of Health, Disability and Ageing).
The MTSS framework defines a flexible, coordinated set of ‘tiered’ supports and interventions ranging from universal evidence-based practices at Tier 1 (for all children and with a preventive focus), targeted supports at Tier 2 (usually time-limited for small groups of children at identified risk or beginning to experience difficulties), and intensive intervention at Tier 3 (highly personalised for children who require more specialised support, often for a longer duration). The guiding assumption is that when children have access to high quality, evidence-based universal practices at Tier 1 they are less likely to require additional support at Tier 2, and when responsive support is provided early at Tier 2 children are less likely to require more resource-intensive Tier 3 support. This assumption is borne out in the international literature for both behavioural and academic support (US Department of Education, 2025)1 and is the basis for numerous school-wide mental health and wellbeing programs2.
1 See https://www.pbis.org/pbis/studies for a database of research curated by the Center for Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports
2 See the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) Wellbeing Program Guide for a national directory of mental health and wellbeing programs for schools and early childhood education settings—https://wellbeingguide.acer.org/
The MTSS framework represents a shift away from traditional approaches to intervention in which children become eligible for additional support or access to intervention programs based on a formal diagnosis. The traditional ‘categorical’ approach requires children and families to wait to receive a formal assessment and diagnosis or wait until the child’s needs reach a certain threshold (sometimes referred to as a ‘wait to fail’ approach), to qualify for support, which is often provided outside the mainstream classroom or learning environment. In an MTSS approach, the successively specialised tiers of support do not represent static categories of children but define the characteristics of supports that might benefit children in a particular domain at a particular time. That is, a child is not a ‘Tier 2 student’ but might receive a mix of universal, targeted and intensive supports across domains that they move between over time in response to their developing needs and regardless of a formal diagnosis (McMillan & Jarvis, 2023).
Foundational supports within Tier 1 include school and classroom practices such as universal design for learning, differentiated learning experiences with the right level of scaffolding and challenge for each child, clear and consistent routines and classroom management practices, and promoting culturally safe and supportive learning environments. At Tier 1, screening, teacher professional judgement and family concerns are methods for identifying children who would benefit from early intervention and targeted supports (Tier 2). A variety of screening tools may be used within mainstream education depending on the domains assessed and the age of children. For example, ACER is currently developing a numeracy screening tool that will help educators identify preschool children who may require additional support in the underpinnings of future mathematical learning.
Tier 2 is characterised by targeted social, behavioural or academic supports (e.g. literacy and numeracy) that are often group-based and can be provided in classrooms (i.e. they are not synonymous with group pull-out programs). These may be delivered by classroom teachers, specialist educators or allied health professionals (e.g. speech and language pathologists, occupational therapists, psychologists). Embedding allied health supports within early childhood and school settings can promote collaboration, build teachers’ capability through modelling and co-teaching and allow for children to receive support in the context of their daily routines and learning experiences. Decisions for entering and exiting targeted supports are based on whether children achieve program goals and no longer require the extra assistance, or whether more intensive, specialised assistance is indicated at Tier 3. Tier 3 supports are highly personalised and typically associated with a formal diagnosis.
While the MTSS framework is highly suitable and recommended for the delivery of foundational supports for children up to 8 years old with mild to moderate support needs, it is also endorsed as an evidence-based approach throughout primary school and into secondary school (Australian Education Research Organisation, 2024). Consistently embedding this framework in both early childhood education and school settings would greatly enhance the transition experience for children and families.
MTSS represents best practice in academic, behavioural and wellbeing support for children with a range of needs and should be the expected mode of delivery for foundational supports through the Thriving Kids initiative. That is, while distinct programs or initiatives should be considered, these will be most effective when embedded within a highly coordinated system of supports accessible through mainstream education settings.
While its effectiveness is well-established, the MTSS framework is challenging to implement without support for its non-negotiable elements. These include:
- Data-driven decision making about the types and levels of support children require, the extent to which children are making progress towards defined goals, and when children are ready to ‘exit’ a particular support or intervention. Leaders and teachers need to collect, understand and use data effectively to make ongoing support decisions.
- High quality, relevant screening and assessment tools to support data-driven decision making. This includes a mix of valid and reliable tools and more informal methods for monitoring children’s progress. It also includes assessment tools that are accessible for all children. The National Preschool Outcomes Measure Tool currently under development is an example of an inclusive, psychometrically valid tool for assessing children’s progress in language and literacy and executive function within the preschool year to support differentiated planning. For primary schools, tools such as ACER’s Progressive Achievement Tests (PAT) which are used in more than 6,000 Australian schools are similarly designed to help teachers understand children’s learning and progress and support planning for diverse learners.
- Collaborative problem solving between educators, families, and allied health professionals to understand and support children’s ongoing needs. This means that educators need space and time to collaborate.
- Embedded support within classrooms, such that specialist educators and allied health professionals work alongside mainstream teachers in early childhood education and school settings.
- Effective leadership to support a consistent sitewide approach towards a shared vision for children’s progress and outcomes.
It is important for families to have access to tools and services that aid in the identification of developmental delay or autism. However, to be well-supported throughout their education, children need teachers and educators who can identify and respond with agility to their emerging and developing social, behavioural, academic and wellbeing needs on an ongoing basis. Children need access to high-quality education programs that employ evidence-based practices across all levels from universal preventive practices to highly specialised individual supports. This requires leadership for coordinated ways of working, rethinking the role of allied health and specialist professionals in schools and early childhood education, and access to quality assessment and
screening tools. We recommend that promoting inclusive MTSS approaches to evidence-based supports for children with a range of needs should be a high priority for the Thriving Kids initiative.
Strengthening workforce capability
Effective foundational supports in schools for children with developmental delay or autism (particularly those with mild to moderate support needs) should be inclusive, developmentally appropriate, and evidence-based, aiming to reduce barriers to participation and progress before formal diagnosis or specialist intervention is required. Achieving this requires a workforce that is confident, highly capable and well-supported to establish inclusive learning environments to teach children with a broad range of support needs.
Findings from the 2024 Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (Friedman et al., 2025) indicate that approximately two-thirds (66%) of Australian primary teachers work at schools where more than 10 per cent of students have specialised educational needs, and this represents a significant increase since 2018 not mirrored by other school composition changes. To implement an MTSS approach as recommended, it is imperative that teachers feel well-prepared and supported to establish and manage learning environments where diverse children can thrive, to implement evidence-based universal (Tier 1) practices, and to engage in collaborative planning, teaching and data-based decision making to support children’s learning, behaviour and wellbeing. Yet, the TALIS findings suggest that more work is needed to build this confidence and capability.
A clear theme to emerge from the TALIS findings is that while Australian teachers are generally positive about the profession, they report higher-than-average stress compared to their counterparts in many OECD countries. Classroom management demands and increasing classroom diversity are among frequent sources of stress reported by primary school teachers, with just over half (51%) naming maintaining classroom discipline as a source of stress. This is more pronounced for early career teachers and those with lower self-efficacy related to classroom management.
Modifying lessons for students with special educational needs is a frequent source of stress reported by 46% of primary teachers, while fewer than half (47%) feel confident to adapt standardised assessments to support participation of children with support needs. Australian teachers feel less confident than the OECD average to collaborate with other professionals to design educational plans for students with specialised educational needs and encourage the involvement of families in their child’s school activities; fewer than half (47%) feel confident to get families involved in the school activities of children with specialised educational needs. They are also less likely than the OECD average to engage in co-teaching (18% vs 31%) despite feeling relatively confident to do so, and the reported frequency of this practice has decreased since 2018. Australian teachers with high self-efficacy are significantly more likely to engage in discussions about the learning development of specific students than teachers with lower self-efficacy (Friedman et al., 2025).
The TALIS findings suggest that classroom management and supporting children with specialised educational needs persist as areas of need for teacher professional learning, support, and resources. Effective multi-tiered approaches to support rely heavily on establishing and managing effective routines and expectations, collaborative planning and teaching, developing inclusive learning experiences for children with diverse support needs, using ongoing assessment to inform decision making, and engaging with families and other professionals. Accordingly, there is a clear imperative to target resources towards building workforce capability (for teachers and leaders) and ensuring access to specialist supports and personnel if the Thriving Kids initiative is to be successfully delivered through mainstream early childhood education and school settings.
Conclusion
The Thriving Kids initiative represents an important opportunity to bolster both preventive supports and targeted intervention for young children with autism and developmental delay through mainstream services. This includes early childhood education settings and primary schools, which already have responsibility to provide high-quality inclusive education that enables all children to participate and make progress from their own starting points. Within mainstream education settings, research and best-practice guidelines support a coordinated MTSS framework of provision rather than a collection of discrete and disconnected programs and services. This approach has the advantage of improving inclusive education and support for all children, and not only those with autism and developmental delay.
While supported by considerable evidence, an MTSS framework can be challenging to implement and sustain. It relies on effective leadership, high levels of collaboration, access to fit-for-purpose tools and resources, embedded support from specialist staff and allied health professionals, and ongoing professional learning for teachers and educators. The education sector would require considerable resourcing to make MTSS an industry standard approach, including to address gaps in current workforce capability. To ensure the success of the Thriving Kids initiative, we recommend promoting and adequately resourcing an inclusive evidence-based MTSS approach as a core priority.
References
Australian Education Research Organisation (2024). Introduction to a multi-tiered system of supports. https://www.edresearch.edu.au/sites/default/files/2024-10/introduction-multi-tiered-system-supports-aa.pdf
Australian Government Department of Education (2023). Review of Inclusion Support Program: Final Report. Deloitte Access Economics. https://www.education.gov.au/early-childhood/resources/inclusion-support-program-review-final-report
Commonwealth of Australia (2023). Working together to deliver the NDIS: Independent review into the National Disability Insurance Scheme: Final report. https://www.ndisreview.gov.au/sites/default/files/resource/download/working-together-ndis-review-final-report.pdf
Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center, & National Center for Pyramid Model Innovations (2023). Indicators of high-quality inclusion. https://ectacenter.org/topics/inclusion/indicators.asp
Friedman, T., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., & Dix, K. (2025). TALIS 2024 Australian report: The Teaching and Learning International Survey. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.37517/978-1-74286-801-1
McMillan, J. M., & Jarvis, J. M. (2023). Ensuring inclusive outcomes for young people with disability within school-wide positive behaviour support. In K. Barker, S. Poed, & P. Whitefield (Eds.), School-wide Positive Behaviour Support: The Australian handbook (pp. 147-169). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003186236-8
Moore T., Imms, C., Luscombe, D., SNAICC authors, Bonyhady, B, Dimmock, K., Deane, K, D’Aprano, A., & Kakoschke-Moore, S. (2025). National best practice framework for early childhood intervention. The University of Melbourne. Commissioned by the Commonwealth of Australia’s Department of Social Services. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-09/national-best-practice-framework-for-early-childhood-intervention.pdf
US Department of Education (2025). Building and sustaining inclusive educational Practices: Aligned with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). https://www.ed.gov/media/document/inclusive-practices-guidance-109436.pdf
Trembath, D., & Wicks, R. (2025). Assessing, differentiating, and reporting the functional strengths and support needs of children for whom there are developmental concerns: Final report. Autism CRC. https://www.autismcrc.com.au/our-work/general/national-framework-assessing-childrens-functional-strengths-and-support-needs