Summary: Miss D complained the Council delayed providing her daughter with the speech and language therapy outlined in her Education, Health and Care plan. We find the Council was at fault as it delayed securing the speech and language therapy. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Miss D complained the Council delayed providing her daughter (E) with the speech and language therapy (SALT) outlined in her Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan.
2. Miss D says E missed out on what she was entitled to. She also says she was put to time and trouble in chasing up the missed provision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement.
5. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information from Miss D. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
8. Miss D and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and statutory guidance

9. A child with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. This sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC plan is set out in sections. Section F sets out the special educational provision needed by the child or young person.
10. The Children and Families Act 2014 says local authorities are responsible for making sure that arrangements specified in EHC plans are put in place and reviewed each year. The Ombudsman cannot look at complaints about what is in the EHC plan but can look at other matters, such as where support set out in an EHC plan has not been provided or where there have been delays in the process.

What happened

11. Miss D’s daughter, E, has special educational needs and an EHC plan.
12. Miss D appealed to the SEND Tribunal about E’s EHC plan. The judge issued a consent order and asked the Council to amend E’s EHC plan to include SALT. This would start when E moved to her new school in September 2021.
13. The Council emailed Miss D and explained the school’s therapist could not provide the therapy E needed. Therefore, it agreed to find a new therapist.
14. Miss D emailed the Council in August and asked if the SALT was going to be in place for when E started her new school. The Council replied and said it had not secured the SALT, but it had been in contact with potential therapists.
15. Miss D complained to the Council on 9 September about its failure to secure SALT for E.
16. The Council responded to Miss D’s complaint on 6 October. It said despite the referrals it had made, it was struggling to find speech and language therapists. It said it was continuing to source a therapist and would update her as soon as possible.
17. Miss D asked to escalate her complaints to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. She said she was unhappy the SALT was not in place. The Council responded and said it would not progress her complaint to stage two. It said once the SALT was in place, it would revisit her complaint and look at her and E’s injustice. It also said it would ask an officer to provide her with an update.
18. Miss D chased the Council for an update on 2, 9 and 16 November. The Council responded and apologised she had not heard anything further. It said it would ask a member of the team to update her.
19. A therapist the Council had previously been in contact with emailed it and provided her availability. The Council agreed to commission her services, and E started receiving SALT on 13 January 2022.

Back to top

Analysis

20. The Council was at fault for the delays in securing the SALT. This meant E was without the provision for the entire autumn term, which is a significant injustice. I appreciate the Council struggled to find therapists, but the law is clear councils are responsible for making sure that arrangements specified in EHC plans are put in place.
21. The delays caused Miss D frustration. The Council also failed to keep her properly informed, and she was put to time in trouble in repeatedly chasing it for updates.
22. The Council said in response to Miss D’s complaint it would assess the injustice caused once it had secured the SALT. It has now done this and proposes paying Miss D £715. This reflects how much the SALT would have been for the term that E missed.
23. The Ombudsman would not usually calculate a financial remedy based on what the cost a service would have been to a council. However, the figure the Council has arrived at it is in line with our guidance on remedies for the impact of missed provision. I also recommend the Council apologises to Miss D and E and makes a further payment to Miss D to reflect her time and trouble and frustration.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. To address the injustice caused by fault, by 29 July 2022 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Miss D and E.
• Pay Miss D £715 to reflect the missed SALT. We would suggest Miss D uses this payment for E’s educational benefit.
• Pay Miss D a further £150 for her time and trouble and frustration.

Back to top

Final decision

25. There was fault by the Council, which caused Miss D and E an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman