Summary: There is no evidence of fault by the Council that has caused significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains on her own behalf, and on behalf of her son, Y. Y had an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan maintained by the Council. The Council’s 14-25 Additional Needs Team became involved and referred Y to a job coach.
2. Ms X complains the Council has failed to support her or her son, who is now not in education, work or training. Ms X says the impact of lack of support has had a severe effect on them both, including their mental health.
3. Ms X complains the job coaching was not comprehensive or successful and education and adult services have not provided support.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated the job coach support provided to Y between March 2024 and March 2025.
8. I have considered whether Y should have received support from education or social care for this period only.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

11. Y had an EHC Plan. Annual reviews were held in 2020 and 2021. The Council intended to cease the EHC Plan in 2021, due to Y not wishing to stay in education but move into employment. It was decided to hold a review meeting in April 2021 and at that point the process to cease was stopped in case Y started a supported internship via a college. Y then decided he did not want to do this, however the Council failed to continue with the legal process to cease the EHC Plan.
12. In June 2021 Y was referred to the Learning Disability Partnership that carried out an adult social care assessment. This noted the EHC Plan had been extended to 2022, but Y stated he did not want to continue education and wanted to find a job. The social worker did not find Y had a learning disability or unmet social care needs. The case was closed with only advice and information provided.
13. My understanding is the only ongoing support was via the Council’s 14-25 Additional Needs Team (ANT) who became involved in May 2021 after the annual review to support Y with his aspirations for employment.
14. Ms X’s complaint relates to the period from Spring 2024 to Spring 2025, when ANT decided Y would benefit from support from a job coach, who was part of the ANT team, to support him finding work.
15. Ms X complained in Spring 2025 that Y had been working with the job coach for over a year but was still unemployed. He had attended only two interviews and applied for a few more positions. Ms X says the job coach advised they were looking at leads, but they then did not hear back. Ms X says she sent jobs to the job coach and had to chase for updates. Ms X says meetings that were planned did not happen and they were told the support would end in September.
16. Ms X says she raised that Y’s EHC Plan had not been updated and was advised this was not necessary as Y was not in education. However, other professionals told her the EHC Plan did need to be reviewed.
17. In response to the complaint the Council upheld there was confusion with the EHC Plan, and it should have been ceased in 2021-2 when Y indicated he would not return to education. The Council apologised this did not happen.
18. The Council said in May 2025 it would now write to Y to cease his Plan.
19. The Council’s complaint response said the job coach had held coaching sessions with Y and assisted with all aspects of job seeking, including attending some interviews with him.
20. The Council had provided me with the job coach’s records, and these do support regular action between February 2024 and March 2025. Part of the work was focussed on Y becoming more independent with leading job hunting.
21. The Council also provided a response to Ms X’s Councillor in July 2025 which stated the job coaching had come to an end. The last email I have seen sending Ms X/Y a job lead was March 2025. There was a suggestion in the letter the support had ended abruptly with Ms X unsure if the job coach had left their post or was on sick leave. The Council told the Councillor that this was not the level of service Ms X/Y could expect and it apologised.

Analysis

22. When there is fault, we need to consider what would have been the outcome if the fault had not happened.
23. Technically Y had a current EHC Plan in force for the period Spring 2024 to Sprong 2025, however this Plan had not been implemented since 2021, following the last annual review. The Plan should also have been reviewed annually until it was formally ceased.
24. The Council has accepted fault in failing to cease the Plan correctly in 2021 when Y indicated he would not return to college or education.
25. Where there is fault, we need to consider what would have been the outcome if the fault had not happened. If the fault had not happened the outcome here would have been that the Plan was formally ceased in 2021. Therefore, it is not the case that Y would have carried on receiving education support after 2021.
26. I find that while there was fault in the administrative process, this has not caused Y injustice as he did not want to return to education after 2021.
27. Ms X and Y always had the option of seeking further support from Education up to Y being 25 as EHC Plans can offer support up to this age. There is nothing in the documents which indicates Y wished to return to education.
28. Ms X has raised that she feels all services have failed Y. While I have not investigated the period before March 2024, I do note than a Care Act assessment was carried out in 2021 and did not identify any unmet needs. Information and advice were provided. Ms X and Y could have re-referred themselves to adult social care at any time.
29. Ms X is understandably disappointed the support from ANT, and the job coach, has not resulted in paid employment. For the period Spring 2024 to Spring 2025 the job coach did meet Y on many occasions and there is evidence to support the job coach did the work the Council set out in its complaint response. I have found no evidence of fault. That the job coaching did not result in successful employment does not mean there was fault in the support provided.
30. The support does appear to have ended abruptly in Spring 2025; around the time Ms X made her complaint. It would have been good practice to have explained the ending of support and signposted to any other support available. Ms X seemed to believe the support would continue until September 2025. The Council has acknowledged the abrupt ending of support was not satisfactory in its letter to the Councillor and apologised.
31. While I appreciate Ms X is disappointed the job coaching was not successful, and the ending of support was clearly not done in a satisfactory way, I do not find the outcome of Y not obtaining employment is due to lack of support by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman