Mr. Jim Mulkerrins:

The bit that we need to fix, however, most of the system is good. Probably all of the SNAs are doing their best and most of them are excellent.

We propose to review the scheme shortly. There should be an ongoing, rolling review. We have only had the circular in place for a year and cannot say that there has been a significant amount of feedback on how well it is bedding in. It will take time. We did not want the circular to have such a large impact as to frighten parents, schools or SNAs, but we are trying to put a little shape on it so that everyone has a better understanding of the SNA's role.

An interesting phrase was used, namely, that reality no longer matched policy. The objective of our review will be to try to bring reality and policy closer together. The system will never be perfect, but we will continue striving to make it grow.

I get anxious, particularly when I hear that individual education plan, IEP, meetings are happening without the presence of SNAs. It is a feature of the circular that, where an SNA is provided, a care plan should be in place. I do not see how a care plan can be agreed without the SNA being involved in the discussion. To respond to Deputy Jim Daly, if further clarification is required, we will consider providing it. It may be possible to do it by informing the system of the need to implement the circular fully.

I realise that Deputy O'Brien has left, but he raised the issue of care supports. It was also raised by Senator Craughwell. It is a question of moving from individually allocated SNAs to shared resources.

Senator Craughwell asked whether that was a funding decision. Often the implication is more a question of causing a problem in the system. It is certainly not a funding decision. The Department’s view is that the historic association between child and SNA was inappropriate. It was an obvious consequence of the fact that when integration or inclusion started and there were only a few children with identified special needs in schools, it would always be the case that SNAs were identified with the children. That was an undesirable feature of the scheme and we have moved strongly to get away from that so that schools would have better control of the resource and parents would not be misguided into believing their child needed that person at his or her side the whole time. That is generally detrimental, and becomes more so as children develop and approach the time when they are transferring into post-primary school and are achieving a degree of independence. This answers a question we were asked earlier: as the children said to the NCSE, when it was researching this, the last thing they want when reaching independence is an adult, sometimes an unfamiliar one, stapled to their sides. We need to be very cautious about how we determine a care need and provide for it for a child who is developing into being a young man or woman in school.

Several people raised the issue about care needs assistants in preschools. I sit on a working group chaired by our colleagues in the Department of Children and Youth Affairs which is considering this matter, and the group hopes to report sometime in the latter part of this year. We are being assisted by colleagues on the NCSE. We hope to have clarification on that area in due course. We all recognise that early intervention is very important, but it needs to be elaborated and clarified. There is a fair bit of work being done on that.

Continuing professional development, CPD, was raised. I fully accept the need for training. There is complexity about how that should be delivered. Ongoing CPD is meaningless unless we have a structured programme for it. We make provision for boards of management to provide individualised, tailored training. There is training from the Middletown Centre for Autism, to which we give funding to provide some training for schools, parents and families to cater for children with significant autism difficulties. We will be able to deal with that in the context of our forthcoming review.

I am concerned when I hear that 8% of SNAs said in surveys that they feel they are not respected. We all need to consider their relationship within the school. That can be improved with proper clarity. When we issue clarification, we are anxious not to be over- or under-prescriptive. We need to provide guidance but we do not need to regulate the hell out of the scheme because that would be in nobody's interests. We are anxious to ensure that the scheme develops in such a way that SNAs feel valued and respected, that their role is clear and their engagement within the school is clear. That means educating teachers, principals and boards of management as well as SNAs.