Summary: Ms X complains about missing psychotherapy support for Mr Y, her adult son, during the summer of 2023 and at the start of the academic year in September 2023. We found there was fault causing injustice when the Council failed to retain proper oversight of Mr Y’s support package, and when it failed to consider the request for summer support in a timely manner.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about missing psychotherapy support for Mr Y, her adult son, during the summer of 2023 and at the start of the academic year in September 2023.
2. Ms X said Mr Y’s former case worker was arranging psychotherapy support for the start of September 2023. The officer also said they would try to arrange psychotherapy support over the summer, as they had the previous year. However, this case worker left the Council and Ms X was not informed.
3. Mr Y needs routine and stability. He was without vital psychotherapy input over the summer and was distressed by the uncertainty of not knowing if his psychotherapist would return for the new academic year. He then had no support in place when he started back at college in September 2023.

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. 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

6. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Ms X provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
8. Ms X 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

9. 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. 
10. The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The annual review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must take place. The process is only complete when the council issues a decision about the review.
11. Within four weeks of a review meeting, the council must notify the child’s parent of its decision to maintain, amend or discontinue the EHC Plan. Once the decision is issued, the review is complete. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 

What happened

12. I have summarised below some key events leading to Ms X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
13. Mr Y experiences emotionally based school avoidance. He has an EHC plan and attends a specialist college as much as his health allows, working towards integrating into full time college.
14. Mr Y receives psychotherapy support through a third-party provider. I will refer to them as ‘the provider’. This is bespoke social, emotional wellbeing, and positive behaviour support which helps Mr Y engage with college. Mr Y received two sessions per week.
15. Support from the provider was in place for the 2022/23 academic year, but was not part of Mr Y’s EHC plan. The Council agreed to fund it on an interim basis, to focus on Mr Y’s emotional understanding and resilience and support his engagement in learning.
16. The Council carried out an annual review of Mr Y’s EHC plan on 21 March 2023. The review confirms Mr Y also had an assessment of his needs under the Care Act 2014. He was supported by a social worker working with him and Ms X.
17. At the review, the provider said Mr Y was making progress and recommended the support should continue from September 2023.
18. Ms X said Mr Y received support from the provider during the summer holidays of 2022. She wanted this to continue for all term breaks. It was recorded Mr Y’s social worker would discuss this with the Council’s SEN service to see whether this would be funded by SEN or social care. The review also suggested further online learning sessions for Mr Y.
19. The provider gave the Council an update on its sessions with Mr Y in May 2023. It asked for a meeting to discuss ongoing family difficulties and possible support. An officer in the Council’s SEN service, who I shall refer to as Officer One, said family difficulties would be something for social care to consider.
20. Officer One then contacted Ms X. Ms X said she spoke to the Council’s social care service, but the case worker was off sick. Ms X said Mr Y needs support during the summer holidays, and the provider works well as they are consistent.
21. The Council issued Mr Y’s final amended EHC plan on 19 May 2023, following the review.
22. Officer One emailed the Council’s moving into adulthood team on 13 June 2023. They sent a report from the provider about Mr Y’s struggles at home. Officer one said they previously messaged the team about Mr Y having summer provision that would need funding. They asked whether anyone picked this up to look into, as Mr Y’s case worker was off.
23. Officer One emailed Ms X on 20 June 2023. They said they contacted the moving into adulthood team a couple of times about support from the provider over the summer. Officer One said they would contact Mr Y’s new case worker and re-forward the emails if needed.
24. Officer One also emailed the provider, asking for costings for the next academic year, and about summer support the previous year.
25. Officer One met Mr Y’s new social worker on 21 June 2023. They discussed Mr Y’s provision and the importance of summer support before the start of the new academic year. Officer One updated Ms X about this discussion and said the Council waited on costings from the provider.
26. The provider sent costings to the Council on 23 June 2023, and a quote for summer support. Officer One sent the costings to the Council’s complex case panel (the panel) for it to consider.
27. The provider chased the Council for an update about funding for the next academic year twice in August 2023. Ms X also asked for an update in August. She also said Mr Y was left without summer support.
28. At the end of August 2023, the Council told the provider Mr Y’s funding should be discussed at the next panel meeting.
29. Ms X emailed the Council on 7 September 2023, after the start of the new academic year. She asked the reason for the delay, and said it caused stress and anxiety to Mr Y, who was without essential psychotherapy support.
30. Ms X complained to the Council on 11 September. She said:
• Officer One’s last contact about Mr Y’s EHC plan and placement for the next academic year was on 21 June 2023. Officer One then left the Council and no one told her.
• The plan agreed in April 2023 was for Mr Y to have support through the summer holidays, like last year, and for support from the provider to continue.
• Mr Y had no support over the summer holidays and started back at college with no psychotherapy support.
• The Council left Mr Y with nothing and not knowing what will happen. His EHC plan is clear he needs routine and stability.
• The Council completed the review process in April 2023 to avoid this from happening.
• She had been chasing the Council for updates with no response.
31. The Council confirmed the panel agreed funding for the provider on 15 September 2023. At this stage, funding was only until October half term. The Council planned to return to the panel about support after October once it had more information from Mr Y’s college. In October, the panel agreed funding for the provider until December 2023.
32. The Council’s stage one complaint response accepted it did not update Ms X when Officer One left. However, it said they did a handover and prepared Mr Y’s case for the panel.
33. The Council said the panel approved funding for Mr Y’s college placement in May 2023, but it did not receive a request for continued support from the provider until later. It recognised its panel should have considered Mr Y’s total package at the same time. It said there were then delays over the summer period. It apologised for the delay and any impact on Ms X and Mr Y. It confirmed it agreed funding for the provider until October half term.
34. Ms X was not satisfied with the Council’s complaint response, and asked for a stage two consideration for the following reasons:
• Council departments blamed each other, leaving her to chase in different directions.
• At the review, Mr Y’s social worker said there would be some summer provision. They just needed some further details and would get back to Ms X. Ms X chased this up, but no one got back to her.
• There was confusion between the provider and the Council’s adult social care service about the requirements for Mr Y’s summer provision. It turned out the Council needed to do a financial assessment, but this was not possible at the end of July, when provision should already have started. Mr Y could not engage with this level of requirement, as he was confused, and Ms X cannot access his financial information as he is an adult.
• The Council should have arranged summer support in April, after Mr Y’s review.
• Ms X asked for compensation for her time and for the extra support Mr Y needed.
35. The Council sent its final complaint response in October 2023. It accepted fault for not sending on Ms X’s emails after Officer One left, and for not updating her.
36. The Council said, moving forward, it is confident it has the extra permanent SEN staff to maintain consistency of support. It again apologised for delays and the distress caused.
37. The Council contacted the provider in March 2024. It confirmed it agreed funding to include sessions for the first two weeks of September 2023, even though the provision did not start until 19 September. It asked the provider to arrange four more sessions for Mr Y to make up for this.

My investigation

38. The Council accepted the delay agreeing funding for psychotherapy support for the start of the academic year in September 2023. It will ensure the missed provision of four sessions is provided retrospectively. It said there were a significant number of cases on the waiting list, and its SEN panel convenes less regularly during summer.
39. The Council recognised the benefit of the provider in supporting Mr Y’s engagement with college. However, it said there is no evidence the delay agreeing funding impacted Mr Y’s ability to engage with college in September 2023, as staff were already familiar to him.
40. The Council told me Mr Y’s social worker liaised with the Council’s SEN service to clarify who would progress summer support. An SEN case officer considered the family difficulties centred on arguments at home, and recommended social care should consider this.
41. The Council said its SEN service cannot fund care or health provision outside normal educational hours unless there is educational need. Anything outside school hours is considered social care unless an extended day is required to deliver educational programmes. The provider is not specified in Mr Y’s EHC plan, nor is there a requirement for psychiatric or psychological input.

Analysis

42. The Council discussed Mr Y’s psychotherapy support for the start of September 2023 at his review in March 2023. However, the Council did not ask the provider for costings until June. There were then further delays as the Council’s panel which approves care package funding met infrequently over summer. The Council did not agree funding for psychotherapy support until mid-September 2023, when Mr Y was already back at college. I found the Council failed to retain proper oversight of Mr Y’s support package, and the Council accepted it was at fault in its complaint response.
43. The Council also discussed Mr Y having psychotherapy support over the summer of 2023. On the evidence seen, the Council’s adult social care service wanted to carry out a financial assessment to determine whether Mr Y should contribute towards the cost of summer provision. The Council needed financial information from Mr Y to complete the assessment. Unfortunately, Mr Y was not able to supply this at short notice, and Ms X did not have permission to access this information.
44. Ms X was unhappy adult social care did not start the process until July 2023, despite the fact she discussed summer support with Mr Y’s social worker at the review in March.
45. I found that, before Officer One left the Council, they sent at least one email to the Council’s moving into adulthood team about funding for summer support from the provider. That was in June 2023 and mentioned an earlier email.
46. The Council therefore had enough time to consider summer support, and should have started the financial assessment sooner, but there was avoidable delay. That was fault.

Injustice

47. Mr Y’s care plan recognises the importance of continuity, and that a period without psychotherapy support can be detrimental to his re-engagement with college. Despite this, there was delay by the Council agreeing funding for support from the provider for the new academic year. This caused Mr Y avoidable frustration, uncertainty, and distress over the summer period and resulted in Mr Y starting the academic year without psychotherapy support. That is his injustice.
48. The Council’s delay and lack of updates also caused Ms X avoidable frustration, uncertainty, and distress.
49. Mr Y missed some psychotherapy support in September 2023. However, the Council has asked the provider to arrange four more sessions with Mr Y to make up for the sessions missed. That remedies some of Mr Y’s injustice.
50. While I appreciate the lack of summer psychotherapy support was potentially detrimental to Mr Y, I have not seen evidence this caused significant injustice in terms of his re-engagement with college. However, the delay and confusion added to the avoidable frustration, uncertainty, and distress Mr Y and Ms X had already suffered.

Back to top

Agreed action

51. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council will:
• Apologise to Ms X and Mr Y for failing to retain proper oversight of Mr Y’s support package and for failing to consider the request for summer support in a timely manner.
• Pay £500 to recognise the avoidable distress both Ms Y and Mr X suffered.
52. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

53. I completed my investigation. There was fault causing injustice when the Council failed to retain proper oversight of Mr Y’s support package, and when it failed to consider the request for summer support in a timely manner.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman