Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to her child’s, Y, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council was at fault. It delayed providing educational provision for Y. As a result, Y missed educational provision for two terms. It also caused Miss X distress. The Council has apologised to Miss X and offered her a remedial payment which was appropriate. The Council has agreed to offer Miss X a further payment to acknowledge the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to her child’s, Y, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She said the Council delayed arranging some of the provision in section F of the EHC Plan, following her appeal to the SEND Tribunal. Miss X also said the Council’s communication was poor. As a result, Y did not receive educational provision for two terms. It also caused Miss X distress. The Council accepted fault, apologised to Miss X and offered her a symbolic payment for the injustice caused. However, Miss X wants the Council to reconsider its symbolic payment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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(i), 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 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke with Miss X and considered information she provided.
7. I considered information provided by the Council.
8. I considered our ‘Guidance on remedies’.
9. Miss X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans

10. Some children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities will have an EHC Plan. An EHC Plan identifies a child’s education, health and social needs and sets out the extra support needed to meet those needs.
11. An EHC Plan is set out in sections. Section F of an EHC Plan details the special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. Councils have a legal duty to ensure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F (Section 42 Children and Families Act).

Education Otherwise Than At School (EOTAS)

12. An EOTAS package is education or special educational provision delivered to children and young people outside of a formal school placement.

Personal budgets

13. A Personal Budget is the amount of money the council has identified it needs to pay to secure the provision in a child or young person’s EHC Plan. One way that councils can deliver a Personal Budget is through direct payments. These are cash payments made to the child’s parent or the young person so they can commission the provision in the EHC Plan themselves.

What happened

14. Miss X’s child, Y, has special educational needs and an EHC Plan. Y does not attend a school and instead, Y has an Education Otherwise Than At School (EOTAS) package in place.
15. In late 2023, Miss X appealed to SEND Tribunal about Y’s EHC Plan. Following this, the Council issued a final amended EHC Plan in early January 2024. The provision within the EHC Plan included weekly speech and language therapy (SALT) which the Council would directly fund.
16. The Council also agreed to provide Miss X with a personal budget to commission provision such as tuition, occupational therapy and other specialist therapy sessions as well as relative fuel costs.
17. In early July 2024, Miss X complained to the Council. As part of her complaint, she said:
• despite having a successful appeal, the Council had failed to deliver SALT;
• Y had met with a tutor but no sessions had taken place;
• the Council had not yet set up a personal budget to cover the other provision and fuel. Miss X said Y had also been attending a specialist therapy session weekly but the Council had failed to provide any funding for it; and
• the Council’s communication with her had been poor.
18. In early September 2024, the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint and:
• said the delay in relation to SALT was caused by the therapist as it had delayed giving the Council their costings;
• explained the costings in relation to the tutor Miss X had found for Y were too high. It said it was in the process of finding another tutor;
• said it had now signed off the personal budget and would issue Miss X backdated payments; and
• accepted it had poorly communicated with Miss X. It said it had identified capacity as an area of improvement and as a result, it had employed more staff earlier in the year. The Council said it had addressed the matter across the team and made it aware of the importance of effectively communicating with parents.
19. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint and apologised to her for its faults. It offered Miss X the following remedy:
• £1300 for missed SALT sessions for two terms between January and July 2024;
• £2400 for missed educational provision. The Council said Y had no access to any educational provision for two terms between January and July 2024; and
• £50 for the distress Miss X experienced.
20. Miss X remained unhappy and complained to us in September 2024. Miss X told us the Council had still not set up the personal budget.

The Council’s response to our enquiries

21. The Council said it had delayed setting up the personal budget because in error, it had not included all the agreed provision within the personal budget. The delay was also caused by obtaining quotes from providers. The Council said it would offer Miss X a further £200 for the delay.
22. The Council said it had now set up the personal budget and backdated all payments to Miss X. The Council provided supporting evidence of this.
23. In relation to the Council’s delay in arranging provision and processing the personal budget, the Council said it would:
• remind staff the importance of arranging provision in a timely manner and keeping oversight of it. It also said it would remind staff to adhere to its standards of customer service by keeping parents informed during the process of arranging provision; and
• remind staff the importance of setting up personal budgets in a timely manner and adhering to the Council’s standards of customer service by keeping parents informed during the process and informing them of any issues.

Back to top

Findings

24. The Council had a legal duty to ensure it delivered Y with the specialist provision as set out in section F of their EHC Plan. The Council delayed delivering the provision and therefore was at fault.
25. In response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council accepted it was at fault and explained some of its reasons why. It offered Miss X a total payment of £3700 for two terms of missed provision between January and July 2024. I have reviewed this remedial payment and I am satisfied it is in line with our ‘Guidance on remedies’. I will therefore recommend the Council re-offers this payment to Miss X.
26. In response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council offered Miss X a payment of £50 for the distress she experienced trying to sort out the provision. In response to our enquiries, the Council offered a further £200 to Miss X. This is appropriate.
27. The Council also apologised to Miss X for the delay in delivering the provision. This was appropriate.
28. The Council told us it would remind staff the importance of ensuring provision and personal budgets were arranged and processed in a timely manner and to adhere to its customer service standards. This is appropriate.
29. In response to Miss X’s complaint, it told Miss X it accepted it had poorly communicated with her. It said it was due to a lack of staff and that it had employed more staff to improve its service. It also told Miss X it had addressed the matter with the team. This was appropriate.
30. In addition to the above actions, I note the Council has developed an action plan following an Ofsted inspection in July 2023. The action plan says the Council will:
• increase and train more staff in order to improve quality and timeliness of existing EHC Plans;
• ensure there is clear monitoring of alternative provision; and
• improve parent communication by keeping parents informed.

Considering the above actions and the action plan following an Ofsted inspection, I will not be recommending further service improvements. We will continue to monitor this through our casework.

Back to top

Agreed Action

31. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• re-offer Miss X the remedial payment of £3700 for the missed provision; and
• offer Miss X £250 for the distressed caused. This payment will include the £50 it offered to Miss X previously and the additional £200 the Council said it would offer to Miss X.
32. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will provide us with evidence it addressed the following with staff:
• the importance of ensuring provision and personal budgets are both arranged and processed in a timely manner, adhering to its customer service standards; and
• the importance of effectively communicating with parents.
33. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final Decision

34. I have now completed my investigation. The Council was at fault. It has agreed to the recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman