School Not Following the IEP: What to Do in Tasmania

You spent three months fighting for an Individual Education Plan — the SSG meetings, the clinical reports, the negotiations over every adjustment. The Learning Plan was finally signed. Then the next term started, and nothing changed. The aide is still absent half the day. The sensory break schedule isn't happening. The modified assessment format was never communicated to the classroom teacher.

In Tasmania, a school failing to implement an agreed Learning Plan is not just frustrating — it is a legal problem. Here is why it matters, and what you can do about it.

Is a Learning Plan Actually Enforceable?

This is the first thing parents want to know, and the answer is more nuanced than a simple yes or no.

A Learning Plan (Tasmania's equivalent of an IEP) is not a contract in the commercial sense — you cannot sue for breach of contract. But it is not meaningless either.

The critical link is NCCD funding. For a Tasmanian government school to access its annual Educational Adjustments funding from DECYP, it must demonstrate to moderators that it has provided the adjustments documented for a student, for a minimum of 10 weeks, with evidence of parental consultation. The Learning Plan is the school's primary evidence for this funding claim.

When a school signs a Learning Plan and then fails to implement it, two things are happening simultaneously:

1. The school is potentially failing in its legal obligations under the Disability Standards for Education 2005, which requires reasonable adjustments to be provided to allow participation in education on the same basis as peers.

2. The school is at risk of not meeting the evidentiary standard DECYP requires for funding — a situation that, ironically, hurts the school's own budget.

This creates leverage. A school that is not delivering on a documented Learning Plan has more to lose than you do if the gap becomes visible to DECYP.

Step 1: Document the Gap, Not Just the Frustration

Before you write any letters, build a precise record of the specific ways the Learning Plan is not being followed. "The school isn't doing what they said" is not useful. "The Learning Plan specifies daily 10-minute sensory breaks administered by the classroom aide; in the 18 school days since the plan was signed, the aide has been present for 7 days and sensory breaks have occurred twice" is useful.

Your evidence log should capture:

• The specific adjustment that was agreed to in the Learning Plan
• The date the plan was signed and came into effect
• A record of each day or incident where the adjustment did not occur
• Any verbal communications from school staff about why

Keeping this log is straightforward: a simple spreadsheet with date, what was supposed to happen, what actually happened, and who you spoke to is sufficient.

Step 2: Raise It in Writing at the School Level

Request an urgent SSG meeting, and put the request in writing via email (so you have a timestamped record). The email should:

• Reference the specific adjustments in the Learning Plan that are not being implemented
• Request that the meeting take place within 14 days
• State that you will need a written explanation for the implementation failures
• Note that ongoing non-implementation may require escalation to DECYP Learning Services

At the SSG meeting itself, make sure everything is documented in the minutes. If the school provides an explanation (e.g., staff absence, resourcing), ensure that explanation is recorded — because "we didn't have the staff" does not satisfy the school's obligations under the DSE 2005, and having it on record gives you a clear basis for escalation.

Refuse any verbal commitments. Every agreed action, responsibility, and timeline must appear in the meeting minutes. Vague language like "we will try to improve the aide schedule" is not acceptable — ask for specific dates, named staff, and measurable frequency.

Step 3: Understand Why It's Happening

There are different categories of IEP/Learning Plan non-compliance, and each has a different response.

Resource failure: The school doesn't have the aide hours, specialist staff, or materials to implement what was agreed. This is the most common reason — and in many cases the school signed a plan that was aspirational rather than resourced. In this situation, your leverage is DECYP's Contingency Funding: the school can apply to the statewide panel (reviewed in Week 7 of each term) for additional resources. Ask the principal directly whether a Contingency Funding application has been submitted.

Communication failure: The Learning Plan exists but has never been shared with all relevant staff, particularly casual teachers and aides. Ask the principal to confirm in writing that all staff who interact with your child have received and read the current plan.

Categorical disagreement: The school has signed the plan but staff members do not believe certain adjustments are necessary or appropriate. This is the most difficult situation — it signals a values or professional disagreement rather than a logistical failure. In this case, escalation to DECYP Learning Services is usually required.

Step 4: Formal Escalation to DECYP Learning Services

If the school-level SSG process does not produce documented, consistent implementation within a reasonable period (two to three weeks is reasonable for urgent issues), escalate formally to DECYP's Regional Learning Services:

• Southern Region (Hobart and surrounds): (03) 6165 6466
• Northern Region (Launceston and surrounds): (03) 6777 2440

Your escalation letter should include:

• A copy of the current Learning Plan with the specific adjustments that have not been implemented highlighted
• Your evidence log documenting the gap
• The minutes from the SSG meeting where the school's explanation was recorded
• A clear statement that the school's failure to implement constitutes a breach of its DSE 2005 obligations
• A specific request: that Learning Services conduct a review of the school's NCCD evidence documentation and the current Learning Plan compliance

Learning Services has the authority to require schools to take corrective action. They can also initiate a review of the school's NCCD categorisation data — which, as noted above, is directly linked to the school's funding.

What If the Learning Plan Itself Is the Problem?

Sometimes the issue is not non-implementation but the plan itself: it was agreed under pressure, contains vague language, or the adjustments specified are insufficient for your child's actual needs.

A plan that says "extra time provided as needed" rather than "30 minutes of additional time for all written assessments" is technically implemented when the school provides extra time once a term. A plan that says "sensory support available" rather than naming the specific sensory break schedule, the responsible staff member, and the frequency is impossible to enforce.

If the plan itself is the problem, the SSG meeting is the place to renegotiate it — but come prepared. Bring the clinical reports from your child's occupational therapist or psychologist that describe the adjustments they recommend. Those reports carry professional weight that the school's internal assessment does not.

The DSE 2005 requires that adjustments be developed in consultation with the parent and that they be reasonable. If a school insists on weaker adjustments than professional reports recommend, ask them to document in the SSG minutes why they believe the professional recommendation is not reasonable — and what alternative evidence they are relying on.

IEP Dispute Resolution: The External Options

If internal DECYP processes do not produce resolution, the parallel external pathways are:

Equal Opportunity Tasmania: A formal discrimination complaint, on the basis that the school's failure to implement the Learning Plan constitutes failure to provide reasonable adjustments under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998. The standard process is a conciliation conference.

Ombudsman Tasmania: An administrative review of whether DECYP has followed its own procedures in handling your complaint.

Australian Human Rights Commission: A federal complaint under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, with the DSE 2005 as the specific standard that has been breached. This is a longer and more complex pathway best suited to serious, sustained non-compliance.

In practice, most Learning Plan disputes are resolved at the DECYP Learning Services stage once the parent makes clear they understand both the legal framework and the funding implications. Schools and regional directors generally do not want a formal discrimination complaint filed against them.

The Tasmania Disability Advocacy Playbook includes the specific escalation letter templates for each stage, calibrated to reference DECYP's own policies and the funding model language that gets the most traction. It also covers how to use the NCCD moderation cycle strategically — including how to position your child's clinical evidence before the July funding cutoff so that the school has the documentation it needs to secure appropriate resources.

See more Australia guides →