Summary: There was a four-month delay by the Council in dealing with Ms X’s request for an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment. Communication and complaint handling were also poor. This caused avoidable distress and a delay in appeal rights. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment of £150 and provide us with a report on how it has reduced waiting times.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to respond to her request for an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Needs assessment within the legal timescale, failed to respond to her complaint and failed to keep in touch with her.
2. She said this caused avoidable distress, inconvenience and a delay in appeal rights.

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 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)
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered the complaint to us and documents from the Council. I discussed the complaint with Ms X
7. 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

What should have happened

8. The SEND Code of Practice says:

• 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. 
• If the council decides not to conduct an EHC needs assessment it must give the child’s parent or young person information about their right to appeal to the tribunal.

What happened

9. Ms X requested an EHC needs assessment on 24 November 2023. The Council did not respond within six weeks, so on 29 January 2024, she complained to its Director of Children’s services. She got no response to her complaint so complained to us in April 2024. We asked the Council what had happened and it told us its panel had discussed the case at the start of April and Ms X would get a written decision no later than 3 May.
10. The Council told us it accepted its decision was late and it apologised. It told us:

“To address this, the Plymouth Local Area Partnership are working together as part of Plymouth’s overall SEND Improvement Plan to review processes, systems and capacity within all contributing services to ensure that children, young people, and their families are not disadvantaged. Within the 0-25 Team, we are actively engaged in improving the service we offer, ensuring that feedback and concerns raised by families inform our learning and development. We have recently put a focused plan in place to address assessments which are currently out of time. We have also devised a training and development programme for all staff so that we can improve our communication and streamline our processes. All activity relating to these measures will be stringently reviewed and monitored to ensure improvements are made to our service.”

11. On 9 May, the Council wrote to Ms X with its decision not to carry out an EHC needs assessment. The letter was wrongly dated 9 April. It explained Ms X’s right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal.

Findings

12. I uphold Ms X’s complaint. There was fault by the Council because:
• It delayed by four months giving Ms X a decision on her request for an EHC needs assessment. This was not in line with the SEND Code of Practice
• It did not respond to her complaint. This was a failure in complaint handling and poor communication.
• There was a failure by the SEND and complaints team to give Ms X any updates. This was poor communication.
• It did not give her a decision on the substantive issue until the LGSCO became involved.
13. This caused avoidable inconvenience, distress and a delay in appeal rights.

Back to top

Agreed action

14. Within one month of my final decision, the Council will:
• Apologise and make Ms X a payment of £150 to reflect her injustice.
• Remind officers in the complaints team to send periodic update emails to people who have complained and are overdue complaint responses.
15. Within three months, the Council will provide us with a written report of how it has reduced the numbers of requests for EHC needs assessments that are delayed. We will require the figures from August 2023 to the end of December 2024. The Council will need to demonstrate a reduction in waiting times.
16. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

17. There was a four-month delay by the Council in dealing with Ms X’s request for an Education Health and Care Needs Assessment. Communication and complaint handling were also poor. This caused avoidable distress and a delay in appeal rights. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment of £150 and provide us with a report on how it has reduced waiting times.
18. I completed the investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman