Summary: We will not investigate this complaint there was a delay in the Council deciding whether to fund a residential placement following an Education Health and Care Plan annual review. That is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained there was a delay in the Council deciding whether to fund a residential placement for his daughter, Miss Y, following the annual review of her Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). He said the Council also failed to issue a decision notice following that review.
2. He said he had to chase the Council for a decision which had caused him avoidable frustration. He wants the Council to fund the residential placement, apologise and compensate them for the time spent chasing up the residential placement request.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council held an annual review of Miss Y’s EHC Plan in March 2024. It notified Miss Y’s parents the outcome of that review in August 2024. At the same time, it contacted its ASC Service about Mr X’s request for residential provision for Miss Y. Between August and November, ASC considered the request for residential. It eventually agreed to the placement but at a weekly cost to Miss Y’s family. Mr X said they cannot afford the required contributions.
7. In its complaint response, the Council’s Special Educational Needs Service accepted there was a delay in it issuing the decision notice following the annual review and apologised. It said that was because of staff shortages. The Council’s Adult Social Care Service also apologised to Mr X for failings in its communication. It said Miss Y did not have an allocated social worker, which meant different duty team workers were following up the request for the residential placement. It said it had allocated Miss Y a dedicated social worker, had agreed to complete carers assessments and would look at alternative options for support.
8. Although Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s handling of his request for a residential placement for Miss Y, we will not investigate this complaint. Firstly, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants; for the Council to fully fund the residential placement. Mr X will need to make a new complaint to the Council if he believes there is fault in how the Council made its decision not to fully fund the placement.
9. In addition, I recognise the delay in issuing the decision notice and making a decision about the residential placement was frustrating for Mr X, but it has not caused Miss Y a significant injustice. Miss Y has not lost out on educational or residential provision, nor did Mr X appeal the EHC Plan. Therefore, the Council’s apology remedies any injustice caused. The Council has taken steps to explore respite and different options for supporting Miss Y. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman