Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed completing his child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment and failed to provide full-time education while his child was out of school. We find the Council at fault for a significant delay in issuing the EHC Plan, failing to properly consider and communicate its section 19 duty, and poor complaint handling. These faults resulted in missed educational provision and created uncertainty, as well as avoidable time and trouble for Mr X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X and take steps to improve its processes for alternative provision and complaint handling.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to complete his child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment within the statutory timescales.
2. He also complains the Council has failed to provide Y with full-time education since January 2025.
3. Mr X says this has resulted in Y missing a significant amount of education, negatively affecting their mental health, and causing financial hardship for the family.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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)
7. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr 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

Relevant legislation

EHC Plan 

10. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the Tribunal or the council can do this. 

Timescales and process for EHC assessment 

11. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following: 

• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 
• If the council goes on to carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 weeks.
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks (unless certain specific circumstances apply). 

Section 19 duty

12. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

Establishing a section 19 duty

13. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.
14. If a council wants to see medical or other evidence, it should ask for it at the earliest opportunity. The council should account for any challenges a parent might have in obtaining evidence, and review its position based on any new evidence it receives.
15. Councils should consider any attempts the school is making to support the child. This might involve sending work home for the child to complete, arranging disability related support, placing the child on a reduced timetable, or providing online education as a short-term measure. If there is a clear, effective, and time-bound plan for reintegration then there may be no immediate role for the council in providing alternative education.

Guide for practitioners

16. We publish good practice guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to identify and arrange alternative educational provision: Supporting children out of school (October 2025)
17. Our guidance says that councils should:

• consider all the reasons for a child’s absence from school, and make a written evidence-based decision about whether it will arrange alternative education provision;
• communicate this decision as a matter of good practice to parents and where it decides not to arrange alternative education tell parents the expectations about school attendance, and the potential consequences for continued absences;
• ensure the provision meets the individual needs of the child where it decides to arrange alternative education and explain its reasons for providing a part-time education if it decides the child cannot cope with full time provision;
• keep all cases of part-time education under review with a view to increasing when the child is able;
• work with parents and schools to draw up plans to reintegrate children to their normal educational setting as soon as possible, reviewing and amending plans as necessary; and
• ensure effective channels of communication between parents, internal teams, and external bodies (such as schools, and the NHS) so that issues are dealt with promptly by the right people, and that any complaints are identified and responded to under the relevant policy.

18. Where councils arrange for schools or other bodies to carry out their functions on their behalf, the council remains responsible. Therefore councils should retain oversight and control to ensure their duties are properly fulfilled.

Part-time timetables

19. The DfE guidance (Working together to improve school attendance) states all pupils of compulsory school age are entitled to a full-time education. In very exceptional circumstances there may be a need for a temporary part-time timetable to meet a pupil’s individual needs. For example where a medical condition prevents a pupil from attending full-time education and a part-time timetable is considered as part of a re-integration package. A part-time timetable must not be treated as a long-term solution. 

What happened

20. In March 2025, Mr X told the Council that Y was no longer attending school. He requested alternative educational provision and asked the Council to carry out an EHC needs assessment.
21. Later that month, the Council held a meeting to discuss Y’s attendance. Mr X asked for alternative provision. It was agreed the school would provide weekly worksheets to support Y alongside a reduced timetable.
22. In April, a further meeting took place. Minutes note that Mr X and Y agreed to continue with the part-time timetable.
23. Later that month, Mr X told the Council and the school that Y was not engaging with the worksheets and again requested alternative provision. He also chased the Council for an update on the EHC assessment. The following day, the Council agreed to carry out the assessment.
24. In May, a multi-agency meeting was held. It was noted that Y was not attending school regularly and that previous measures, including a part-time timetable, had not improved attendance. Mr X reported Y was not engaging with home learning. The Council said there was insufficient evidence from education or health professionals to justify alternative provision at that stage.
25. Following the meeting, Mr X complained to the Council about the lack of alternative provision. He explained the barriers preventing Y from attending school and asked what steps the Council would take.
26. The Council responded by referring to delays in the EHC assessment process due to high demand and shortages of educational psychologists.
27. Mr X replied to clarify that his complaint concerned the lack of alternative provision, not delays to the EHC assessment, and asked the Council to address this issue.
28. Around this time, the Council asked Mr X to provide medical evidence explaining why Y could not attend school, including professional recommendations about Y’s educational needs.
29. In June, Mr X made a further complaint. He said Y had not received full-time education since January 2025 and that the Council had failed in its duty to provide suitable education or alternative provision. The Council said it would respond in early July.
30. In July, the Council said a further multi-agency meeting reviewed Y’s attendance, wellbeing, and the effectiveness of support strategies.
31. Later that month, having received no response to his June complaint, Mr X asked the Council to escalate the complaint to stage two. The Council apologised for the delay and said it would respond within 10 working days.
32. In August, Mr X chased again after the Council missed its deadline. The Council apologised for the continued delay.
33. In September, the Council issued its stage two complaint response. It apologised for delays in completing the EHC assessment and offered £100 per month for the delay until a decision was made or a final Plan issued.
34. Mr X then brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
35. In September and October, educational psychologist assessments of Y were completed.
36. In April 2026, the Council issued Y’s final EHC Plan.
37. In response to my enquiries the Council said the delay in completing the EHC needs assessment was due to delays in obtaining educational psychology advice, additional time requested by Mr X to comment on draft decisions, consultation processes, and internal procedures.
38. The Council also said it had formally considered Y’s attendance in May 2025 and decided to take a graduated approach, including early help coordination and school-led interventions.
39. It explained it treated Mr X’s concerns about alternative provision as part of the ongoing EHC assessment process and therefore responded within SEND processes rather than through its complaints procedure.

My findings

Delay issuing EHC Plan

40. The Council was required to issue Y’s final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the request made in March 2025. This meant the Plan should have been issued by August 2025. Instead, it was not issued until April 2026, a delay of around eight months. This was fault.
41. Although the Council has provided reasons for the delay, these do not fully account for the length of time taken and do not remove its statutory duty to meet the required timescales. The delay initially caused uncertainty for Mr X and Y and later meant Y missed out on special educational provision they should have received earlier.
42. Where fault results in lost provision, we usually recommend a financial remedy to recognise the impact. Taking account of Y’s individual needs, I consider £1,200 per term to be appropriate.

Alternative provision

43. The Council became aware in March 2025 that Y was not attending school. At that point, it should have considered whether Y was receiving suitable education and, if not, whether it had a duty to arrange alternative provision.
44. The Council did not formally consider this until May 2025. This two-month delay was fault.
45. When the Council did formally consider the matter, it decided it did not have a duty to provide alternative provision due to insufficient evidence. However, it had not requested medical or other supporting evidence at the earliest opportunity. It only did so after making its decision. This meant the Council failed to properly consider all relevant information and did not make a fully informed, evidence-based decision. This was fault.
46. The Council also failed to clearly communicate its decision to Mr X. This was fault.
47. The Council considered the school’s part-time timetable to be appropriate. However, there is little evidence the arrangement was regularly reviewed or adjusted when it proved ineffective. This was fault.
48. If the Council had acted without delay, gathered appropriate evidence, and clearly communicated its decision, it is not possible to say, even on the balance of probabilities, whether it would have decided it had a duty to provide alternative provision. However, its failure to do this creates uncertainty for Mr X and Y.

Complaint handling

49. The Council said it dealt with concerns about alternative provision through SEND processes rather than its complaints procedure.
50. This was not appropriate. Mr X clearly made complaints about the lack of alternative provision, and the Council failed to respond to these. This was fault. Instead, the Council responded to issues Mr X had not raised. This denied Mr X a clear explanation of the Council’s position and caused him avoidable time, trouble, and uncertainty in pursuing his complaint.

Back to top

Action

51. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mr X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• pay Mr X a total of £2,780, comprised of:
1. £200 to recognise the uncertainty caused by the delay in obtaining educational psychologist advice;
2. £2,030 to recognise the loss of special educational provision;
3. £300 to recognise the uncertainty caused by the failure to make a timely, evidence-based decision on alternative provision and communicate this to him; and
4. £250 to recognise the time and trouble caused by its poor complaint handling.

This is instead of any remedy the Council may have already paid following its offer of £100 a month due to Education, Health and Care needs assessment delay.

52. Within three months of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• create an action plan which sets out how, in future, it will avoid similar failures to consider its section 19 duties to children out of school; and
• we publish the Complaint Handling Code which sets out best practice in how councils should deal with complaints. In this case, we found the Council at fault because it failed to respond to or address the matters complained about. In order to prevent similar faults from happening in future, the Council has agreed to consider our guidance and tell us what action(s) it will take to improve the way it deals with complaints.
53. I have not recommended further action regarding wider delays within the Council’s SEND service. This is because the Council has already provided assurances to the Ombudsman about the steps it is taking to address these delays and is in the process of implementing those improvements.
54. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

55. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman