Summary: Dr X complained about delay in the Education, Health and Care Plan process and lack of education and support for her child’s special educational needs. We ended our investigation because the Council accepted it acted with fault and offered an appropriate remedy.

The complaint

1. Dr X complains about delay in the Education, Heath and Care Plan process and lack of education and support for her child’s (Y) special educational needs.
2. She says this caused considerable distress and affected Y’s welling and future prospects.

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. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. 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.
6. 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

7. I considered evidence provided by Dr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Dr X and the Council have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Special educational needs

Education, Health and Care Plans

9. A child or young person with special educational needs (SEN) 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.

Timescales and process for EHC assessment

10. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability Code of Practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014.
11. The Code says the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks.
12. As part of the EHC assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND 2014 Regulations, Regulation 6(1)). This includes advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP). Those consulted have six weeks to provide the advice.

What happened

13. Dr X’s son, Y has special educational needs. Y stopped attending school due to a decline in his mental health.
14. In August 2023, Dr X asked the Council to carry out an EHC needs assessment. The following month, the Council agreed to do so. The final EHC Plan was issued in January 2025. The delay was, in part, caused by a local and nationwide shortage of educational psychologists.
15. In July 2024, Dr X complained to the Council about delay in the EHC Plan process, lack of education and SEN support and poor communication.
16. In the Council’s final response to Dr X’s complaint, it accepted it acted with fault and offered to pay Dr X:

• £800 for delay in the EHC plan process;
• £1800 for a term of missed provision; and
• £1000 in recognition of the distress caused by poor communication and case handling

17. The Council also accepted there was a long period of inactivity in progressing in EHC Plan caused by staff absence. The Council acknowledged it failed to properly communicate with Dr X during this time. It explained action it had taken to address this.

Analysis

18. There was clearly significant delay in issuing the final EHC plan. The law says it should take 20 weeks from when the EHC needs assessment is requested. In this case it took approximately 15 months to issue the final plan. This delay was fault.
19. To the Council’s credit, it carried out a thorough investigation into Dr X’s complaint and offered to pay Dr X £3600 to acknowledge the injustice caused to Dr X and Y.
20. This offer is in line with the Ombudsman’s published Guidance on Remedies and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome. I am also satisfied that with the action taken by the Council to improve its service to ensure cases are not allowed to drift, particularly during staff absences.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have ended my investigation and uphold Dr X’s complaint. The Council provided a suitable remedy that resolved the outstanding issue and no further action by the Ombudsman is needed.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman