Speech Therapy and Occupational Therapy in a Northern Ireland SEN Statement

Speech and language therapy (SLT) and occupational therapy (OT) are two of the most frequently contested provisions in NI Statements — not because the EA denies that children need them, but because of a structural question that has profound legal consequences: which part of the Statement they are written into. Getting this wrong means the EA bears no legal liability if the therapy is never delivered.

The Part 3 vs Part 6 Problem

A Statement of SEN has six parts. Parts 3 and 6 both describe provision, but they are governed by completely different legal obligations.

Part 3 (Special Educational Provision) is legally binding on the EA. The EA must arrange everything written in Part 3. If it is not delivered, the EA is in breach of a statutory duty and the matter is reviewable by SENDIST.

Part 6 (Non-Educational Provision) describes provision that will be arranged by a Health and Social Care Trust. Parts 5 and 6 are not enforceable through SENDIST. If a therapy is placed in Part 6 and the HSCT fails to deliver it — due to staff shortages, waiting lists, or funding constraints — the EA bears no legal liability whatsoever.

The EA routinely proposes that SLT and OT appear in Part 6 or Part 5 of the Statement. This is financially advantageous for the EA: it transfers the obligation to deliver to the Health Trust while maintaining the appearance of provision in the Statement.

When SLT and OT Are Educational Needs

The classification of SLT and OT depends on their purpose. If a child requires speech and language therapy to access the curriculum — to understand verbal instructions from teachers, to communicate within the classroom, to process spoken language — this is an educational need. It directly affects the child's ability to learn. It belongs in Part 3.

Similarly, if a child requires OT to manage the physical demands of the school environment — to hold a pencil, to participate in practical tasks, to manage transitions safely, to regulate sensory input in the classroom — this is an educational need. It belongs in Part 3.

The NI High Court case Re C, McD and McG tested this boundary directly. The case involved children with severe learning difficulties whose SLT recommendations from the Health Trust were adopted in unquantified form into the Statement — with therapists arguing that flexibility made quantification inappropriate. The Court confirmed that communication therapies required for curriculum access are educational provision, and that vague Part 3 Statements describing them in flexible terms do not comply with the law.

How to Identify the Problem in a Proposed Statement

When your Proposed Statement arrives, check where SLT and OT recommendations appear:

• If they appear only in Part 5 or Part 6, with nothing in Part 3, the EA has classified them entirely as non-educational provision
• If they appear in Part 3 but with language like "SLT advice will be incorporated into the school programme" or "the school will liaise with the HSCT OT," this is effectively passing delivery to the Trust without an enforceable EA obligation
• If the provision is quantified in Part 3 — "45 minutes of direct speech and language therapy delivered by a qualified SLT, once per week" — this is enforceable

What to Write in Your Challenge

If you find SLT or OT in Part 6 that should be in Part 3, your written representations during the 15-day window should:

1. Identify the specific therapy and the Part it is currently in
2. State explicitly that this therapy is needed to access the curriculum and is therefore an educational need
3. Reference the professional reports — SLT assessment, OT report — that describe the educational impact of the therapy
4. Request that the provision be moved to Part 3 and quantified with hours, frequency, and the qualification of the delivering professional

If the EA insists the therapy is non-educational, ask them to explain in writing why a child cannot access the curriculum without this therapy but the therapy is not educational provision. This is a hard argument to sustain and may prompt a more reasonable draft.

What Specific Part 3 SLT and OT Provisions Look Like

The level of specificity required varies with the complexity of need, but the baseline standard is: hours per week, frequency, delivery method, and professional qualifications required.

Examples:

• "45 minutes of direct speech and language therapy, delivered individually by a qualified Speech and Language Therapist, once per week during term time"
• "Speech and language support programme implemented daily by a trained teaching assistant under the oversight of the SLT, who will review and update the programme termly"
• "30 minutes of occupational therapy delivered three times per week by a TA trained by the HSCT OT, with termly review by the OT"
• "Sensory diet programme implemented at specific transition points in the school day, developed by the HSCT OT and delivered by trained staff"

The EA may argue that HSCT therapists cannot commit to specific hours. This is not grounds to move the provision to Part 6 — it is grounds to require the EA to secure a commitment from the HSCT to the hours required, or to commission the therapy from an independent provider if the Trust cannot deliver.

For a template challenge letter addressing Part 3 vs Part 6 classification of therapies, the Northern Ireland SEN Statement Blueprint covers this area in detail with NI-specific examples and letter frameworks.

See more United Kingdom homeschool guides →