Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her child, Y’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment and plan. Miss X also complained about how the Council dealt with her carer assessment application. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Y and Miss X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s delays with:

• dealing with her child’s, Y, Education, Health and Care needs assessment
• issuing Y’s final Education, Health and Care Plan
• dealing with Miss X’s carer assessment application.

2. Miss X said the Council’s failings caused her and Y significant distress and affected both their physical and mental health. She said Y lost out on education, provision and support. Miss X also said her work was affected which led to financial loss.

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. 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)
5. 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)
6. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered the information she provided. I also considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries.
8. I have exercised discretion to investigate matters from 2021. This is because I needed to consider the whole period to carry out a meaningful investigation.
9. I have sent Miss X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and considered all comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.

Education, Health and Care (EHC) Needs Assessment and EHC Plan

11. Y has some medical conditions and Miss X is her main carer.
12. On 13 August 2021, Miss X requested an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for Y after Y was diagnosed with asperger’s syndrome. The Council agreed to carry out an EHC needs assessment for Y. The Council then decided to issue a EHC Plan for Y after it considered all the reports it received from the professionals who worked with Y.
13. In early March 2022, the Council issued Y’s draft EHC Plan. The Council held a meeting with Miss X and some professionals to discuss Y’s draft plan. Miss X made representations. The Council issued four subsequent draft EHC Plans for Y between April and early May 2022.
14. On 5 May 2022, the Council issued Y’s final EHC Plan.

Parent Carers Assessment and Grant

15. In June 2021, the Council had a carers conversation with Miss X. The Council found Miss X was eligible for carers needs. It provided Miss X with an emergency card, signposted her to relevant local services and advised Miss X she could contact the carer support team for information regarding her caring role. It was agreed that Miss X’s carer plan would be updated as and when required.
16. The Council received Miss X’s request for a disability registration pack in July 2021. It sent the form to Miss X and asked her to complete and return the form to the Council. Miss X told the Council she did not receive the initial pack, so it hand delivered another disability registration pack to Miss X in August 2021.
17. In October 2021, the Council made a decision that Y did not qualify to be registered as a child or young person with a disability. This was because although Y’s medical consultant confirmed she had aspergers, the consultant did not consider her medical condition was substantial and that it had no long-term adverse effect on activities of daily living. The Council informed Miss X about its decision and advised she could apply again for registration if Y’s condition worsened in the future.
18. In November 2021, the Council asked Y’s medical consultant to reconsider its initial decision about Y’s eligibility to be registered as a child with a disability. The consultant advised the Council to seek Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) opinion on the matter because Y was known to CAMHS for a longer period. The Council sent a disability registration form to CAMHS.
19. In February 2022, having received no response from CAMHS, the Council sent a second letter with the disability registration form to it asking for its opinion about Y’s disability.
20. In June 2022, CAMHS completed and returned the disability registration form to the Council. It confirmed Y’s disability was substantial and that it had long-term adverse effect on her activities of daily living. The Council informed Miss X and sent her a carers grant form to complete and return to it, so her carers grant payment could be processed.
21. In July 2022, the Council received Miss X’s completed carers grant form and paid her £300 carers grant.

Miss X’s Complaint

22. At the end of March 2022, Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council. She complained about the Council's delay in dealing with Y’s EHC needs assessment and its failure to issue Y’s final EHC Plan. Miss X also complained about how the Council dealt with her carers grant application. This included the lack of support by the carers team, its unclear carers application process, lack of multi-agency working and its poor communication with her. Miss X said the Council’s delays and failings caused her and Y distress and anxiety. Miss X said her work had been affected and that Y had no support with her educational needs.
23. On 25 May 2022, the Council issued its stage 1 response to Miss X’s complaint. This was after it sent Miss X four different holding response letters since she made her complaint to it. The Council acknowledged and apologised to Miss X for its delay with Y’s EHC needs assessment and with issuing her final EHC Plan. It explained the delays were due to issues with drafting Y’s plan. The Council said it had dealt with the matter, allocated an alternative officer to Y’s case and that the final EHC Plan was issued on 5 May 2022. The Council confirmed support was given to Y. The Council apologised for its carer team’s poor communication with her. The Council confirmed it sought opinions from relevant medical professionals but explained the decision as to whether Y was eligible to be registered as a person with disability was not its decision.
24. Miss X was dissatisfied with the Council’s response and asked it to escalate her complaint. She also said the Council had sent her four holding letters which further caused her anxiety and distress.
25. In its stage 2 response, the Council reiterated its initial findings and further explained that:

• it sent the holding letters to Miss X when it was clear it could not issue its stage 1 response within 21 calendar days. It apologised for the confusion and anxiety caused to Miss X
• it was not its usual practice to request a second medical opinion as to whether a person was eligible to be registered as disabled. The Council said seeking a second opinion from CAMHS showed it attempted to support as much as it could to achieve the outcome Miss X sought
• CAMHS had responded/ given its medical opinion about Y’s disability, the Council confirmed Y had been registered as a person with a disability, Miss X’s carers grant was being processed and that it had informed Miss X about these updates.

26. The Council apologised again for its delays with Y’s EHC needs assessment and plan. But it said Y received support while her EHC Plan was being drafted and that Y continued to receive the support. The Council said the case had progressed and it would be unable to offer Miss X any compensation.
27. Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s final response. She complained to the Ombudsman.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council confirmed its delays with Y’s EHC needs assessment and final plan was due to resource issues while drafting the EHC Plan. Also, the Council said it did not carry out a ‘Keeping in Touch’ carers review with Miss X, which should have taken place in July 2022. But it explained it sent a letter to Miss X in December 2022 asking her if she still required a carers assessment. The Council said the letter stated activities would end if no response was received. The Council confirmed Miss X did not respond to its December 2022 letter. The Council also provided information and evidence of the support Y had received prior to when it issued her final EHC Plan.

Analysis

29. The law requires the Council to issue a final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of receiving a request for a needs assessment. Miss X requested an EHC needs assessment for Y on 13 August 2021 and the Council issued Y’s final EHC Plan on 5 May 2022. This was a total of 38 weeks, therefore a delay of approximately 18 weeks. This was fault and not in line with statutory timescales. The Council’s delay caused Y and Miss X distress and the time and trouble Miss X went to in chasing the Council and complaining. The Council’s delay also meant Y did not have a final EHC Plan in place sooner. And she was disadvantaged by the Council’s delay and lost out on some of the provisions as contained in her final plan dated 5 May 2022. However, I note Y received some support from her school and external providers prior to when her plan was finalised which mitigates the injustice caused to Y. The support provided to Y included career pathway support, preparation into adulthood, communication, emotional and sensory regulation interventions, time allowed to attend school late, time out passes at school, de‑brief with school staff member, safe space support and 1:1 support with English tuition.
30. As regards the carers grant, it took almost one year before Miss X received the £300 carers grant. While I note Miss X did not receive the initial disability registration pack the Council sent to her, it sent a further pack to Miss X which she received in August 2021. I consider the delay was minimal and there is not enough injustice caused to Miss X to warrant further investigation on the matter. In October 2021, the Council decided Y was not eligible to be registered as a person with disability. The Council based its decision on the medical opinion it received from Y’s consultant. This was not fault.
31. The Council then sought a second opinion from CAMHS in November 2021 and again in February 2022 about Y’s disability. The Council received CAMHS response in June 2022 which found Y’s disability was substantial and that it had long-term adverse effect on her activities of daily living. Based on CAMHS response the Council processed and paid £300 carers grant to Miss X in July 2022. There were some delays, but I do not find fault by the Council. The delay by CAMHS in completing and returning the disability registration form to the Council contributed to the delay with the Council awarding the grant to Miss X. The delay by CAMHS is out of the Ombudsman’s remit. Although, I consider the Council could have chased CAMHS for its response sooner than February 2022 and before it responded in June 2022. However, I cannot say CAMHS would have responded sooner even if the Council had chased it for its response. The Council paid the £300 carers grant to Miss X in a timely manner after it received CAMHS response. This was not fault.
32. However, I suggest the Council should consider it makes its carer assessment and grant application processes clearer to its service users. This would manage service users’ expectations and prevent any ambiguity about the Council’s processes. It should also consider monitoring the key stages of the carer assessment process such as the ‘Keeping in Touch’ carers review. This is to ensure the process timescales are adhered to.
33. With the Council’s complaint handling, there was a delay by the Council in issuing its stage 1 response to Miss X. She made a formal complaint to the Council on 31 March 2022 and the Council issued its stage 1 response on 25 May 2022. This was more than 21 calendar days and was not in line with the Council’s complaint policy. This was fault. The Council has apologised to Miss X for its delay in issuing its stage 1 response to her. I consider the Council’s apology to Miss X is proportionate in accordance with our guidance on remedies.

Back to top

Agreed action

34. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following within one month of the final decision:

• apologise again in writing to Y and Miss X in recognition of the injustice caused by its delays in dealing with Y’s EHC needs assessment and with issuing Y’s final EHC Plan. The apology should be in accordance with our new guidance, Making an effective apology
• pay Miss X £500 for Y in recognition of the loss of some provision as contained in the final EHC Plan due to the Council’s delays
• pay Miss X £250 to acknowledge the distress and avoidable time and trouble caused to Miss X for chasing updates with Y’s final EHC Plan
• by training or other means remind staff of the importance of adhering to the Council’s complaint procedure / timescales.

35. Within two months of the final decision:

• produce an action plan to demonstrate how the Council will meet statutory timescales for EHC needs assessments and EHC Plans.

36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I find evidence of fault by the Council leading to injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman