Education systems have tended to be designed around a narrow definition of how students learn best. They typically privilege attention, linear processing, and standardised expression. For decades, support for students who learned differently was reactive and bureaucratic, often mediated through analogue Individualised Education Plans (IEPs), paper records, and infrequent specialist interventions.
That model is now being challenged given the rise of AI-enabled interventions that are viable.
A convergence of increased awareness of neurodivergence and advances in AI-driven personalisation is reshaping how educators think about inclusion. The shift accelerated during the pandemic, when remote learning forced institutions to rethink accessibility at scale. Recorded lectures, captioning, flexible pacing, and digital collaboration tools - once niche accommodations - became mainstream.
At the same time, awareness of neurodivergent conditions has grown significantly. Neurodivergence is an umbrella term that includes a range of cognitive differences such as:
- ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder): characterised by differences in attention regulation, impulsivity, and executive functioning
- Autism: often involving differences in social communication, sensory processing, and pattern recognition
- Dyslexia: affecting reading, spelling, and language processing
- Dyspraxia: impacting motor coordination and organisation
- Dyscalculia: affecting mathematical reasoning and number processing
Rather than viewing these as ‘deficits’ as has historically been the case, there is a growing recognition that they represent different cognitive profiles, often associated with strengths such as creativity, systems thinking, and problem-solving. The challenge and opportunity for education systems is to design environments that accommodate this diversity from the outset.
As Dave Tucker, CEO of Genio puts it:
“Assistive technology is no longer niche - it’s gone mainstream, as big tech integrates features like screen readers and speech-to-text into everyday tools. This shift means specialist providers must differentiate not on access, but on product design, pedagogy and their ability to innovate using their expert knowledge of learner needs.”
NB: This article primarily focuses on B2G/B solutions, rather than B2C. We expect many companies in the space to operate with a B2B2C model, utilising schools and wider institutions as a means of distribution.
The core problems holding the system back
We wanted to approach this write-up from a different angle to our usual thematic write-ups - we wanted to set out the known problems in the system that need solving.
While awareness of neurodivergence has improved significantly in recent years, the day-to-day reality inside K12 systems remains constrained by structural, operational, and cultural barriers. These challenges are most visible in early and middle schooling, where timely support is most critical, but often hardest to deliver.
The companies that win and endure will be those that meaningfully solve one or likely more of these problems. The list is not intended to be a list of VC-backable opportunities - most won’t be. It’s more to highlight the painpoints in our current system that could be compellingly solved by founders in the space.
1. Delayed identification during critical development windows
In K12 education, early identification is everything. The earlier a child’s needs are understood, the more effectively support can be embedded into foundational learning.
But in practice:
- Children often wait months or years for formal assessment ****(e.g., ADHD, autism, dyslexia)
- Teachers may recognise challenges early, but lack authority or tools to escalate quickly
- Screening processes are inconsistent across schools and regions
- Subtle presentations (e.g., inattentive ADHD, high-masking autism, girls with dyslexia) are frequently missed
In early primary years, this delay is particularly damaging. A child struggling with reading due to dyslexia, for example, may fall behind within the first months of schooling. Without support, this gap compounds rapidly, affecting confidence, behaviour, and long-term attainment. Identification is not continuous and embedded into everyday learning environments.
2. Reactive and fragmented support plans (IEPs / EHCPs)
Once a need is identified, the process of securing and implementing support is often slow and disjointed.
In K12 settings:
- IEPs/EHCPs can take months to formalise, especially where external assessments are required
- Plans are typically static documents, updated infrequently
- Classroom teachers may not have full visibility or time to implement recommendations consistently
- Communication between schools, parents, and specialists is often fragmented
In primary schools, where one teacher may be responsible for most subjects, this creates a heavy burden. In secondary schools, the problem shifts - students interact with multiple teachers, increasing the risk of inconsistency in support. Support infrastructure is administrative rather than adaptive, making it difficult to respond to changing student needs in real time.
This is why products by companies like Genio gradually expand to fulfil the needs of students. As Dave Tucker, co-founder at Genio shared:
“Genio started as a simple accommodation tool for lecture recording but evolved into a learning platform focused on developing study skills like comprehension, memory, and review- because true accessibility should not just be about access to information but access to the learning process itself.”
3. Teacher capacity, training, and cognitive load
Teachers are at the centre of inclusion, but are rarely equipped with the time, training, or tools required.
In a typical K12 classroom:
- Teachers manage 20–30 students with diverse learning profiles
- Formal training in neurodivergence is often limited or theoretical
- Differentiation requires significant planning time, which is already constrained
- Behavioural challenges linked to unmet needs can consume disproportionate attention
In early years and primary settings, teachers are expected to both identify and support needs. In secondary schools, subject specialisation often reduces confidence in adapting teaching methods.
The result is a reliance on:
- generalised strategies
- trial-and-error approaches
- support staff (who are themselves stretched)
Inclusion depends heavily on individual teacher capacity, rather than being systematically supported through tools, training, and infrastructure.
4. Asymmetric information for parents and carers
For families, navigating the K12 support system can be overwhelming.
Parents often face:
- Unclear pathways to diagnosis and support
- Limited transparency on what schools can or should provide
- Complex, jargon-heavy processes (e.g., IEPs, EHCP applications)
- Long waiting periods with little guidance on interim support
In many cases, parents become the primary advocates and coordinators of their child’s care—researching interventions, pushing for assessments, and translating between educators and clinicians.
This creates significant inequity:
- Families with more time, resources, or system knowledge secure better outcomes
- Others may not recognise or act on early signs, delaying support further
5 Weak feedback loops and limited evidence in classrooms
K12 education systems often lack clear mechanisms to evaluate what is working for neurodivergent learners.
In practice:
- Teachers receive limited real-time data on intervention effectiveness
- Progress is measured through broad assessments that may not reflect individual growth
- Interventions are rarely tested or iterated systematically
- Tools are adopted without strong evidence of impact
For example, a student may receive additional reading support, but there may be no clear, continuous measurement of:
- which methods are most effective
- how engagement changes over time
- whether adjustments are needed
Dave Tucker, co-founder of Genio, suggests that proving efficacy is how you build an enduring company.
“Initial uptake of tools may come through grants or accessibility mandates, but sustained growth across campus requires evidence of impact. Genio is focused on helping institutions define success upfront and measure progress over time, linking tool use to persistence and retention.”
6. Transition gaps within K12 (Primary → Secondary)
Transitions are particularly challenging for neurodivergent learners, even within the K–12 system itself.
The move from primary to secondary school introduces:
- Multiple teachers instead of one central adult
- Increased organisational demands (timetables, homework, transitions between classes)
- More complex social environments
- Reduced individual oversight
Support structures often do not transfer seamlessly:
- Information may be lost or diluted
- New teachers may lack context on student needs
- Students are expected to self-manage more independently
Transitions are treated as administrative events, rather than critical developmental moments requiring targeted support.
Funding models supporting neurodivergent students
Access to support for neurodivergent students within institutional environments is largely shaped by national funding systems, which determine how tools, services, and accommodations are accessed. While these systems vary by country, they tend to follow a similar structure: a formal assessment or diagnosis unlocks eligibility, which then enables funding for specific types of support such as assistive technology, specialist services, or adjustments in learning environments.
In the UK, the primary mechanism in higher education is the Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA), a non-repayable government grant available to students with disabilities, including neurodivergent conditions. For the 2026–2027 academic year, students in England can receive up to £27,783 per year, with similar but slightly different caps across the UK—for example, up to ~£34,000 in Wales and ~£25,000 in Northern Ireland. The funding typically covers assistive technology, equipment, and human support such as note-takers, mentors, or interpreters, and is allocated following a formal needs assessment. Importantly, funds are often paid directly to approved suppliers, creating a structured ecosystem that strongly influences which tools are adopted at scale. However, a review is being undertaken on DSA, exploring the possibility that only free tools should be available to neurodivergent students. This would significantly change the market and viability of many startups in the space.
In contrast, the United States operates a more decentralised, rights-based model. Legislation such as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees access to accommodations, particularly in K12. IDEA alone represents a significant public funding stream, with tens of billions of dollars allocated annually at the federal level (e.g. ~$15B+ in recent years) to support education services, supplemented by substantial state funding. While there is no universal per-student grant equivalent to the UK’s DSA, universities are required to provide accommodations, often funded through institutional budgets, federal aid, and internal disability services.
Across Europe, Australia, and Canada, funding models typically combine elements of both approaches. Many countries offer some form of public allowance or grant, sometimes comparable in scale to the UK’s DSA, alongside institutional responsibility for providing accommodations. In practice, annual support levels often fall in the range of several thousand to tens of thousands of euros per student, depending on needs, country, and level of study. These systems are frequently linked to healthcare pathways, meaning that access to funding is closely tied to formal diagnosis.
These funding structures play a critical role in shaping the market. In systems like the UK, where funding flows through approved suppliers, procurement dynamics strongly influence which products succeed. Companies must not only build effective tools but also navigate accreditation processes and integrate into assessment pathways. In more decentralised systems like the US, adoption is driven more by institutional decision-making and individual advocacy, creating a more fragmented but potentially more flexible market.
Across all regions, diagnosis acts as a gatekeeper to support, reinforcing a model where access is triggered reactively rather than proactively. Funding also tends to prioritise certain types of support, particularly assistive technology and human services, while leaving gaps in areas such as early intervention, continuous monitoring, and consumer-first tools. Funding remains fragmented across life stages, with different systems governing K12, higher education, and the workplace. This lack of continuity means that support rarely follows the individual seamlessly over time.
Startups: who’s leading the charge?
A new wave of startups is emerging to address long-standing gaps in identification, support, and accessibility.
Some notable categories of innovation include:
AI-driven assessment and early detection
Tools are being developed to identify markers of autism, ADHD, and other conditions earlier and more efficiently, helping reduce reliance on scarce specialists and long waiting times.
Assistive communication and accessibility tools
Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC), text-to-speech, and speech recognition technologies are enabling students to access and express information in ways that align with their needs.
Learning support platforms
Lecture capture, summarisation tools, and adaptive learning systems help students process information at their own pace, particularly benefiting those with attention or processing differences.
Condition-specific learning tools
Targeted platforms are emerging for dyslexia (reading support), ADHD (focus and behavioural coaching), and broader executive functioning support for both students and parents.
With these four categories in mind, we formed a market map with the categories along the x-axis and the education phases - Pre-K, K12 and HE - down the y-axis.
Double-clicking on HE:
We consider higher education - and for that matter, alternative vocational routes that are pursued at age 18 including early careers- to be a relatively under-supported part of the neurodivergence ecosystem.
While K12 education has seen growing investment and structural attention around neurodiversity, higher education remains fragmented, under-tooled, and largely reactive. This creates a significant opportunity - not just for startups, but for institutions willing to rethink how learning support is delivered at scale.
As Dave Tucker, CEO at Genio, states:
“In higher education, support for neurodivergent students is still largely compliance-driven and disconnected from student outcomes. Tools are often procured reactively, not strategically, with little attention to how they support retention, learning, or overall success.”
At its core, HE represents a transition from supported to self-managed learning. For neurodivergent students, this shift is often abrupt and poorly scaffolded.
The fundamental shift in Higher Education is this: in K12, the system (imperfectly) supports the student. In HE, the student is expected to support themselves.
The opportunity is to build systems that:
- replace lost scaffolding with intelligent, adaptive support
- embed accessibility into the core learning experience
- empower students with tools for self-understanding and self-management
1. The sharp drop-off in structured support
In K12 systems, support (however imperfect) is at least formalised through IEPs/EHCPs and coordinated involvement from teachers and parents.
In HE, students must self-disclose their needs, support is often centralised in disability services offices, rather than embedded in teaching, adjustments (e.g., extra time, note-taking support) are standardised, not personalised, and there is limited proactive identification or monitoring
We discussed this with Dave Tucker, CEO at Genio. Dave is more focused on the K12→ HE transition but the points resonate here:
“There’s a glaring transition cliff: around 65% of students who had support in high school don’t register for disability services in college. Stigma, identity fatigue, and a desire for independence create a huge latent user base - learners who won’t label themselves ‘disabled’ but still need help.”
Executive functioning becomes the bottleneck
University success depends heavily on skills that disproportionately challenge neurodivergent students on themes like time management, task initiation, organisation, prioritisation and independent study. These are rarely taught explicitly, yet are assumed.
There is a substantial opportunity to develop tools that act as “cognitive scaffolding layers”:
- AI study planners
- adaptive task breakdown systems
- context-aware reminders and nudges
- tools that integrate directly into course structures
Learning is less structured, but more rigid
HE offers flexibility in theory (fewer contact hours, self-paced study), but in practice, this means that content is still often delivered in lecture-heavy formats, assessments are rigid (essays, exams), and accessibility is treated as an add-on, not embedded.
For neurodivergent students, recorded lectures help, but are insufficient on their own, variability in teaching styles across modules creates inconsistency, and there is little personalisation at the curriculum level.
There is a chance to reimagine elements of HE with solutions that provide multi-format content layers (text, audio, visual, summarised, interactive), AI-driven content transformation (e.g., simplify, summarise, reformat) and personalised learning pathways within existing courses.
Weak feedback and limited visibility
In universities, feedback loops are often delayed and opaque with few data points between major assessments, limited insight into engagement or comprehension, and students may not realise they are struggling until it’s too late
This disproportionately affects neurodivergent learners, who may need more frequent feedback, providing clearer signals on progress and adaptive intervention earlier in the term.
Social and environmental challenges are under-addressed
HE is socially and emotionally complex, owing to new environments, unstructured social systems, sensory challenges (shared housing, large lecture halls) and increased independence.
For autistic students in particular, this can be a major barrier to persistence and wellbeing.
Avenues of differentiation and building moats
Several key themes are emerging:
1. Data Moats (longitudinal & cross-context)
The most defensible companies will own longitudinal, multi-context data across a learner’s journey. This could include early signals (Pre-K screening, behaviour patterns), classroom performance (K–12) and independent learning + outcomes (HE). The key is not just volume of data, but: consistency over time and linkage across environments (school, home, clinical).
The moat becomes unique datasets that competitors cannot easily recreate that become particularly powerful when tied to: diagnosis → intervention → outcome loops and/ or regulatory or institutional partnerships.
2. Embedded workflows (not standalone tools)
Point solutions struggle with adoption in education systems. Winners will likely do a combination of integrate into classroom workflows (K–12), embed into study habits and LMS systems (HE) and reduce friction for teachers and students. The moat is high switching costs once embedded as products become part of lesson planning, assessment and daily study.
Chris Hughes, founder of Estendio, shared
“We have adopted the suite approach because we want to be the world’s leading accessibility company. This means we need to solve as many of the big problems as we can for neurodivergent and disabled people.
The neurodivergent and disabled community remain a deeply underrepresented group in terms of the quality of support available and we want to change that.”
3. Distribution moats
In education, distribution is often harder than product. Strong companies are able to secure access through trusted channels + institutional lock-in. Once embedded at system level, competitors face long procurement cycles, high switching friction and reputational barriers. Further, as mentioned briefly in the introduction, there are significant opportunities for companies utilising a B2B2C business model, utilising institutions as a means of distribution, particularly if focused on non-institution time - i.e. time beyond the classroom or lecture theatre at home or in the community.
4. Longitudinal learner profiles
As discussed, support is fragmented across stages (Pre-K → K–12 → HE). There is a major opportunity to: build portable learner profiles, track progress across years and institutions and connect diagnosis → intervention → outcomes. The moat can potentially become lifecycle ownership of the learner relationship, which, combined with data moats and institutional integrations, can prove particularly powerful.
5. Evidence & outcomes layer
A major gap in the market is proving what actually works, as with other areas of formal education. Differentiated players will measure impact continuously, link interventions to academic and behavioural outcomes and generate evidence usable by schools, parents, and policymakers. This creates validated outcomes and trust which is playing a growing roles in procurement decisions, public sector adoption and where relevant, clinical credibility.
6. Community plays
Communities are an increasingly prevalent means of differentiation
“We created ”This Student Needs” as a way to centre the lived experiences of disabled and neurodivergent students. It started as a TikTok account to promote the Disabled Students Allowance - helping students understand what support they could get and how to navigate the process but quickly grew into something much bigger- millions of views, thousands of comments, and a platform where students openly share what’s missing in education today.
That community has become a real-time feedback loop for us. We use it to test ideas, validate pain points, and spark product concepts directly from the voices we’re building for. It’s also played a big role in building brand trust—especially in a space where authenticity, not polish, matters most.”
