Summary: The Council was not at fault for deciding it did not owe a section 19 duty to secure suitable alternative education for Ms X’s child Y when they stopped attending school in December 2024.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to put in place alternative educational provision for Y after they stopped attending school. Ms X says as a result Y has missed out on a suitable education which has caused distress, frustration and uncertainty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. 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

Relevant law and guidance

6. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that the council 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.
7. 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)
8. 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.

9. 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.

What happened

10. Ms X has a child Y with special educational needs (SEN) who was attending a mainstream high school. In December 2024, Y stopped attending due to SEN related difficulties.
11. The Council said it became aware Y was not attending school in March 2025.
12. In April 2025, Ms X asked the Council to consider putting in place alternative provision. The Council’s panel decided to reject the request in May 2025 for the following reasons:
• It questioned whether the Y’s doctor had completed a full assessment as they had not seen Y in person;
• There was no evidence of whether the school had implemented the emotionally-based school non-attendance (EBSNA) toolkit or support from an Emotional Literacy Support Assistant (ELSA);
• It said it would like to see more evidence of a graduated response; and
• It queried why Y was not on the SEN register and whether Y’s needs could be explored by external professionals.
13. The same month Ms X made a stage one complaint about the Council’s failure to implement alternative provide. She said the following:
• Y has been absent from school since December 2024;
• Y had attended multiple NHS services including A&E, an overnight stay in hospital and the GP;
• The GP had referred her to mental health and SEN services;
• Y is currently unable to attend school due to health needs;
• Ms X has provided detailed medical evidence; and
• She requested the Council reconsider its section 19 duties.
14. The Council responded to the stage one complaint as follows:
• The panel declined the referral due to insufficient evidence of a graduated response;
• There was insufficient evidence of strategies recommended to help identify underlying reasons for young people who are experiencing emotionally based school avoidance;
• The GP carried out a phone consultation with Ms X but did not physically see Y; and
• The Council had called Ms X to further explain the actions that may better support another referral. On the call, Ms X said that she felt some information provided by the school was inaccurate and said she would raise this as a complaint with the school.
15. In July 2025, the Council emailed the school advising it could hold a further panel at the end of July to re-consider alternative provision if it sent further medical information by mid-July.
16. In August 2025, Ms X asked the Council for an update and it advised it had received no further medical information to take to the panel. It said the next panel would take place at the end of September 2025 and advised it would need the re-referral and supporting medical evidence five working days before.
17. In August 2025, Ms X escalated her complaint to stage two for the following reasons:
• The Council failed to acknowledge or act upon medical evidence provided by multiple NHS professionals and the GP;
• Y remains without access to any form of education despite being unfit for mainstream attendance since 20 December 2024;
• The request for face-to-face tutoring has been wrongfully denied based on the claim of insufficient evidence despite clear documentation from healthcare professionals; and
• The lack of action is causing further distress, anxiety, and regression in Y’s mental health, which now includes severe separation anxiety, and complete disengagement from learning and social development.
18. At the start of September 2025, Ms X emailed the school to say she was withdrawing Y from the school roll with immediate effect. Ms X decided to electively home educate Y. Ms X hired a tutor to provide personalised home education support within a 1:1 setting. The tutor reported this was going well in March 2026.
19. The Council responded at stage two the same month saying the following:
• The Stage 1 complaint response addresses all the work that has been ongoing to support Y with education; and
• The school is offering Y provision on another site in the form of tuition.
20. Ms X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of the matter and complained to us.

My findings

21. In April 2025, Ms X requested the Council put in place alternative provision. The following month the Council decided not to implement alternative provision as there was insufficient evidence the school had used all the support available to try and reintegrate Y back into school. There was also little evidence of a graduated approach in place. This includes identifying Y’s needs, putting support in place and reviewing Y’s progress. It was reasonable for the Council to request the school put in place additional support for Y and takes steps to reintegrate them back into school, prior to agreeing to alternative provision. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision and therefore, I cannot question it.
22. We would expect the Council to keep this decision under review. It asked the school to send further information for July 2025 so it could review its section 19 duty but the school did not respond. It then offered to review the decision again following the summer holidays. However, by this point, Ms X had decided to electively home educate Y so it had no further duty. The Council took the correct steps to keep the decision under review and therefore, was not at fault.

Back to top

Decision

23. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman