Short answer: when a student changes school, or moves from one school form to another, the school they leave has a legal duty to hand over the information the new school needs to make the transition work. For a student who has been receiving support, that includes which stödinsatser they had and, where one exists, the åtgärdsprogram. The support is meant to follow the student, not restart from zero.
What the law says
The duty sits in chapter 3 of skollagen (3 kap. 12 j §). When a student moves to another school form, the school unit the student leaves must hand over “sådana uppgifter om eleven som behövs för att underlätta övergången för eleven,” the information about the student that is needed to ease the transition. The same applies when a student changes school unit within the same school form.
Skolverket’s guidance is explicit about what this means for students who receive support: information about which support measures a student has had, and which are judged to be needed at the new school unit too, should be passed on so the transition is eased. If an åtgärdsprogram exists, it should be transferred. It is the sending school that judges what is relevant, but for a student in need of support, Skolverket’s own position is that a handover is almost always warranted, precisely so the new school can put support in place from the start rather than rediscovering the need months later (Skolverket, “Överlämning vid skolbyte”).
The transfer is not conditional on formal consent, but the sending school normally makes the judgment about what to pass on in consultation (samråd) with the student and, where relevant, the guardians. The point of the handover is the student’s continued schooling, so what gets shared is what serves that.
Why transitions matter most for neurodivergent students
For many students, a new school is an administrative event. For a neurodivergent student, it can be the moment everything that was working quietly falls apart. The concrete extra anpassningar that a class teacher had learned by trial and error, a clear structure, text-to-speech, short steps, a seat away from the door, do not exist on paper unless someone wrote them down. The relationships that made those adjustments work do not transfer at all. A transition is exactly where a student who was managing can start to slip, and where slipping can turn into the absence a school then has a duty to investigate.
That is what the överlämning duty is there to prevent. When the sending school passes on what support the student had and why, the new school does not have to start from a blank page at the worst possible time. When it does not, the student pays for the gap, often silently, while the new school slowly relearns what the old one already knew.
The weak point is the handover itself
The law is sound. The failure, when it happens, is practical. An överlämning that lives in one teacher’s memory, or in a document that never quite gets read before term starts, is only as reliable as the handover process around it. The right to support exists; whether it survives a change of school depends on whether the information actually moves with the student.
This is where the work Nuro does matters. When a student’s profile, the needs identified at the start, the adaptations that were tried, what worked and what did not, is held as a living record rather than reconstructed from scratch by each new teacher, the överlämning stops being a fragile manual event. The support the law says should follow the student can actually follow the student. For a parent whose child is not getting the support they need after a move, that difference is the whole difference.