To provide recommendations for consideration in relation to funding models that could best support inclusive education within the Victorian context. 2. Introduction This review presents an exploration of how best to fund students on the Autism Spectrum within inclusive school settings. Funding models to facilitate the implementation of inclusive educational policy have demonstrated that there is currently no agreed-upon method for the support of this group of students. Indeed, the heterogeneity of the population of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) presents as a unique instructional challenge as they exhibit a wide range of behavioural and learning challenges to educators and administrators. This report reviews international and Australian literature to identify current best practices for supporting students with ASD in inclusive classrooms. Funding models are analysed as to their potential effectiveness for the Victorian context. Key considerations when choosing appropriate funding models to support students with ASD are highlighted and recommendations based upon best practice models potentially most applicable for supporting students within inclusive classrooms are outlined. 3. Methodology In order to identify articles for the review, electronic databases (ERIC, PsychInfo and Google scholar) were searched using keywords such as "autism", "inclusive education" and "funding models"; "ASD", "inclusive education" and “funding models". As a key focus of the review was to look at contemporary funding models, the search was restricted to articles published since 2005. We have incorporated additional articles relevant to the broader focus of the review (e.g. best practices to teach students with ASD). We also included policy documents that were available in the public domain and relevant to the review. Abstracts of all identified articles were read to determine the eligibility of the identified article for inclusion in the report. It became clear that the majority of the articles identified in the process did not specifically describe funding of students with ASD. Instead, most articles described funding for all students with disability and referred to education of students with ASD in various parts of the report. This is not a surprising finding considering most jurisdictions, nationally and internationally, do not fund the education of students with ASD differently compared to students
10 studies that had investigated the outcome of five broadly different funding models. Even then, these studies relied on limited data such as surveys, analysis of existing data sources, or qualitative analysis of the funding models. Such information provided stakeholder perceptions and enrolment trends but were limited in their ability to measure the actual impact of the funding reform on student outcomes. The five funding models identified by Sigafoos et al (2010) were related to the broad categories of discretionary, categorical, voucher, census-based, or cost-based. These reflected a continuum of approaches from census-based at one end to categorically-based at the other. Of note was that most applications of the models investigated in reality included elements of more than one approach to funding. Each of these models was seen to have noticeable benefits but also a number of detriments. Table 1 summarises the findings noted by Sigafoos et al. (2010). Table 1 - Five funding models identified by Sigafoos et al. (2010) Model Explanation Benefits Detriments Discretionary funding Provision of additional funding or allocation of a percentage of the school budget for special education purposes Increased capacity to provide SEN services, but only for schools that received extra funding Development of innovative, programs Did not significantly increase the percentage of students identified as having high support needs Increased use of alternative placements Narrowing of curriculum offerings Substantial administrative costs associated with the identification process Categorical A set amount of additional funding is provided for each student with an identified disability (may be given to the school or to the parent) Strengthened parent choice Increased expenditure on direct services SEN funds being used primarily to hire teaching assistants Curtail accountability to parents Create inequities for students with SEN Increased litigation related to special education entitlements Voucher A direct public payment to parents to cover their child’s public or private school costs – payable directly to the parent or the school chosen by them Increased access to preferred and more specialised services Effects of voucher programs on educational outcomes and is unclear Census-based Funding received by a school district or LEA was based on the number of students and weighted by SES or type and degree of disability Did not appear to reduce SEN enrolments in regular schools Increasing SEN costs
Funding decisions are needs based with support being offered at different levels, often through elaborately articulated frameworks. Table 2 provides a summary of the current funding models applied in the different jurisdictions across Australia. These data are obtained via Government web sites, published reports and by contact with representatives from the different departments of education, wherever possible, in order to confirm the currency of these models. In some instances, it was not possible to endorse this information. Table 2 - Funding models employed in all states and territories of Australia for students with ASD State Funding Model Mild to Moderate Needs High to Very High Needs Staffing Regional Resource Teachers WA Input & Output Through-put Student-centred funding model based on number of children & school level (commenced 2015) Output Funding allocated to schools for the number of children in the lowest 10% of NAPLAN scores Input Avail for specific students with disability. Funding allocated to schools based on individual categories of educational need and teaching & learning adjustments required ‘Disability allocation’ will replace teacher, EA & other staff District consulting teachers for Tier 1 & 2 support. Tier 3 support only for students with identified disability from SEND Learning Disabilities Education Service NSW Input & Output Through-put Student-centred funding model based on number of children, school level & climate. Output ‘Every Student Every School’ resource allocation for low level adjustments for disability based on 3yr data from NAPLAN Input ‘Students with disability in regular classrooms’ Funding Support is a targeted disability program. SS must have an identified disability as defined by the NSW DET criteria. School Learning Support Team Regional funding support committee NT Input Input Based on application through Support Service Request Form Input Special Education Support Program (SESP) Special Education Teacher (SET) Autism Advisors provide advice and support to school
in consultation with Student Services Case Manager Special Needs using Special Needs Profiling Instrument (SNPI) SS must have an identified disability as defined by the NT DET criteria School Support team School contact communities and families for students with ASD Qld & Input Through-put Whole-school Student Learning Support Resources (WSSLS) Input Education Adjustment Program (EAP). SS must have an impairment (formal diagnosis) and activity limitation School team Case manager/ School contact person Advisory visiting teachers (AVT), Therapists, Teacher aides, DET funded nurses TAS & Input Through-put ‘Fairer funding Model’ Base funding per capita + loadings for five key areas of disadvantage Linked to Schooling Resource Standard Input Register of Students with Severe Disability (SDR) Support teachers in each school Learning Service Teams (regional) include: Speech & Language pathologists, Autism Consultants, PI coordinators, HI service, Vision SA Input Input Disability Support Program allocated on a per capita basis through Education Office in collaboration with team leaders Input Disability Support Program allocated on a per capita basis through a state-wide moderation process Team leaders Regional disability coordinators State-wide Autism Intervention Program Panel ACT Input Input Student Centred Appraisal of Need based on: Access Participation Student Support Disability Education Partners VIC & Input Through-put Base funding per capita + equity loadings for student family occupation, Input Program for Students with Disability (PSD) (moderate to high level disability) Levels 1-6 Student Support Group Student Resource Package