Invisible Needs and Uneven Recognition: A National FOI Study of Autism Support Across Diagnostic Stages in U.K. Universities

This study investigates how universities in the United Kingdom identify and support autistic students across three groups (diagnosed, seeking diagnosis, self-identifying without wishing to pursue a diagnosis). In addition, it examines communication practices and interim adjustments. Freedom of Information (FOI) request questionnaires, issued under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000 and FOI (Scotland) Act 2002, were submitted to 142 publicly funded U.K. universities, generating 125 valid responses (88%). The 77-item FOI questionnaire comprised multiple-choice and open-text items. Data were analysed descriptively and using qualitative content analysis. Results revealed 50% of institutions reported data on formally diagnosed autistic students, 16% on students seeking diagnosis and 7% on students who self-identify without wishing to pursue diagnosis. Only 2% of universities reported formal policy guiding disability staff when responding to undiagnosed autistic students. The findings suggested that institutional practices varied across universities and by diagnostic group. Staff judgement and discretion mostly determined availability of support and adjustments. Support was frequently dependent upon diagnostic evidence. Reliance on individual staff decisions may contribute to variability in support across the three groups of autistic students. Therefore, future research should focus on the experiences of autistic university students across the three groups and how they navigate university and institutional support. Lay Abstract This study looks at how U.K. universities recognise and support autistic students. We focused on three different types of autistic students: those who enter university with a formal autism diagnosis, those currently seeking an autism diagnosis and those who consider themselves autistic but do not wish for a formal autism diagnosis. Currently, there has been little research about how universities identify these students or decide what help to offer. To gain a better understanding, we sent detailed questionnaires to every publicly funded university in the United Kingdom using Freedom of Information requests. This approach meant that publicly funded universities were legally required to provide information about their policies and practices. We received 125 valid responses out of 142 universities, an 88% response rate. Our questionnaire included multiple choice questions and areas in which universities could provide extra information if they wished. This allowed us to gather numbers and real-world examples from staff working in university disability support services. After data analysis, results showed that only half of universities kept records on students with a formal autism diagnosis. Fewer collected information about students seeking a diagnosis (16%) or who self-identify as autistic without wishing for a diagnosis (7%). Just 2% had a formal policy guiding staff on how to support students who do not have a diagnosis. In most cases, adjustments and support for undiagnosed students were left to staff judgement, and often depended on providing medical evidence, even though the law says support should be given based on need, not just diagnosis. These findings highlight large differences in how universities identify and support autistic students, especially those without a formal diagnosis. This raises important questions about fairness and consistency, and what more can be done to ensure all autistic students can access the help they need during their studies.