Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to provide Speech and Language provision as outlined in her child’s education, health and care (EHC) Plan. The Council is at fault for failing to provide the provision and it failed to meet statutory timeframes in issuing a final EHC Plan following an annual review. This has caused a loss of provision and avoidable distress. The Council has offered a suitable remedy for the loss of provision and it has agreed to remedy the avoidable distress caused by the delay in finalising the EHC Plan. The Council has also agreed to make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to continue to provide a remedy previously agreed with the Ombudsman. She said the Council began providing her with payments for Speech and Language Therapy (SaLT) for nine months but then it stopped the payments when it decided to reassess Y’s communication needs.
2. Ms X says her daughter has continued to miss SaLT provision which she is entitled to and which allows her to properly access her education. The Council has also caused Ms X distress, uncertainty and frustration.

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 evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

8. 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.
9. The council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act).
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.
11. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.

Back to top

What happened

12. Ms X’s child, Y, has special educational needs (SEN) and began attending college in September 2023. She has an EHC Plan maintained by the Council. Section F of the EHC Plan includes that Y needs Speech and Language Therapy (SaLT).
13. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman about how the Council had not arranged the SaLT. In October 2022, the Ombudsman issued a final decision. We found:
• the Council did not start its search for SaLT soon enough and it did not keep Ms X informed about the supply issues within the service area;
• no SaLT was arranged following the Council’s complaint response where it had acknowledged the fault; and
• no SaLT was provided to Y from June 2020 to September 2022.
14. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and to Y and make a symbolic payment in recognition of the provision Y had missed, and for the distress and frustration it had caused. The Council also agreed to the following:
• It would make immediate arrangements for Y to receive her SaLT provision in accordance with her EHC Plan;
• Where compliance with the above is not possible due to lack of availability, if Ms X is happy to receive a direct payment to make the arrangements herself, the Council should consider doing so; and
• The Council would take action, at a senior level, to address the shortage of SaLT provision in the Council area.
15. The Council apologised to Ms X and to Y and made the remedy payments. It also provided Ms X with payments to arrange the SaLT. Ms X arranged for Ms W, a qualified Speech and Language therapist to deliver the provision. Y responded positively to the provision provided by Ms W. She worked with Y from December 2022 to 20 September 2023.
16. In September 2023, Ms X requested an emergency annual review meeting to request the Council continue to fund the SaLT provision. The Council said it would ask its Panel to review the request for funding. The Panel was of the view Ms W had recommended an extremely high level of direct therapy, the recommendations were not based on any formal assessment and a reassessment by the NHS SaLT was necessary. The NHS was unable to assess Y due to her age and in November 2024 the Council approved an independent provider to reassess her communication needs.
17. The assessment took place in April 2025 and the report was provided to the Council in May 2025. The independent assessment said the recommendations by Ms W were appropriate and it would be helpful for Y to continue working with her. The independent assessor said if another therapist were to be introduced, a longer transition period would need to be accounted for in sessions to build a rapport.
18. The Council sent a draft EHC Plan to Ms X for comments on 1 August 2025. Y’s EHC Plan is yet to be finalised.
19. Ms X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. The Council has acknowledged the recurrent fault and has offered a remedy of £10,875 to account for the lack of provision and distress caused.

Back to top

Analysis

20. From October 2023 to July 2025, Y did not receive the SaLT provision as outlined in her EHC Plan. This is fault. The Council has acknowledged the provision should have continued while it was reassessing her communication needs. The absence of SaLT has had a significant impact on Y. I have received a statement from her where she explains the struggles she has faced without the weekly sessions with Ms W. She explains her difficulties in breaking down verbal instructions and managing her increased anxiety. She is worried it will result in her being out of education again and feeling isolated. Reports from Ms W and the independent assessor appointed by the Council also highlight how well Y responded to the SaLT and the positive impact it made on her education and transition to adulthood.
21. The injustice to Y warrants an appropriate remedy. The Council should also take relevant steps to identify why it did not continue to provide the provision as outlined in the Plan when it was reassessing Y’s needs and identify and deliver any training to council officers to remind them of the Council’s Section 42 duty.
22. Between October 2023 and September 2024 there were several instances of delay in presenting the request for funding to the Council’s Panel and delay in contacting the NHS SaLT. This is fault. Ms X requested the outcome of the funding request on several occasions during this period. It caused avoidable distress. This injustice warrants a remedy and the Council should investigate the cause of the delays and identify what action it can take to ensure it does not happen again.
23. It also appears that the delays in requesting and obtaining an independent assessment of Y’s communication needs has resulted in a significant delay in Y’s EHC Plan being finalised. The annual review took place in September 2024 which means the Council should have issued the final EHC Plan by 19 December 2024.
24. The Council was waiting for the independent assessment to be completed before it drafted and finalised Y’s EHC Plan. The Council received the report from the assessment in May 2025 but it did not send the draft Plan to Ms X for comments until 1 August 2025. This is further avoidable delay. Due to the length of time that has passed, receiving the draft EHC Plan in August 2025 caused Mrs X confusion about which review it related to as Y’s next annual review was due the following month.
25. The Council says that SaLT provision has been agreed for 70 hours across the next academic year (starting September 2025). The Council has confirmed it has secured Ms W to deliver the provision to Y.
26. I have not seen any evidence this Plan has been finalised and issued to Ms X. This significant delay is fault. It has delayed Ms X’s appeal rights to the Tribunal, it has caused uncertainty over a prolonged period and frustration. This continuing injustice warrants a remedy.
27. Despite our findings in our earlier investigation and the Council’s agreement to our recommendations, Ms X and Y have found themselves in the same situation they were in three years ago. This has caused further frustration to Ms X, it undermines faith in the Ombudsman service and shows a disregard for Ms X and particularly Y.
28. The Council has acknowledged the recurrent fault and has offered a remedy of £10,875 to account for the lack of provision and distress caused. This offer remedies the injustice caused to Y. I understand Y is now 18 years of age therefore I recommend the remedy payment for loss of provision should go directly to her.
29. The Council has made some service improvements following this complaint. These include:
• The creation of another Panel;
• Panels are now held weekly;
• Recruiting a Panel Resource Manager to ensure better oversight of processes and decision-making;
• Investment in permanent staff and reduced use of agency staff;
• An overhaul of Quality Assurance processes, frameworks and audit tools;
• A new Quality and Performance Board has been introduced where complaints and investigations by the Ombudsman will be a key focus.
30. These service improvements are welcomed by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Agreed Action

31. To remedy the injustice identified in this decision, the Council has agreed that within one month of the date of this final decision, it will:
• Write to Mrs X and to Y separately to apologise for its failings. We publish Guidance on Remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy the injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology;
• Pay Y a symbolic payment of £10,375 to acknowledge the impact of the lost provision between October 2023 to July 2025;
• Pay Y a symbolic payment of £800 for the avoidable distress caused by the delay in finalising her EHC Plan. This is £100 for each month of delay up to and including August 2025. The Council should continue to pay Y £100 for each month of delay up until the final EHC Plan is issued;
• Pay Mrs X £500 for the avoidable distress it caused to her;
• Make immediate arrangements for Y to receive the SaLT provision in accordance with her EHC Plan. If the Council is unable to find a suitable SaLT provider, it should provide Ms X with a direct payment to make the arrangements herself.
32. The Council has also agreed that within four weeks of this final decision, it will identify what it will do to ensure it will provide SaLT to Y as outlined in her EHC Plan to ensure there is not a loss of SaLT provision in the future. The Council will implement these steps without delay and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of the implementation.
33. The Council will also within three months of the date of this decision, review what went wrong in this case and identify what actions it can take to reduce delay in decisions by its Panel and ensure provision in an EHC Plan continues to be delivered when a reassessment of need is taking place. The outcome of the review and the steps to be put in place to prevent a recurrence will be provided to the Ombudsman.
34. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman