Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to complete an Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her child within statutory timeframes. We found the Council at fault for delays, causing significant frustration, distress and uncertainty. It was also at fault for its complaint handling and not making a decision about alternative provision. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to complete an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her child (Y) within statutory timeframes. She also says the Council has not provided support for her child who has had limited education for years. This has caused significant frustration and distress to the family, and her child has missed out on educational progress.

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, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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(1), 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

What I have and have not investigated

6. Miss X refers to Y having limited education since 2021. Miss X complained to us in January 2025. Part of the complaint is therefore late (see Paragraph 3). I will not consider that far back as I am satisfied Miss X could have come to us sooner about this earlier period.
7. I have investigated events from 2024 to mid-2025 (when the Council issued a final EHC plan and Miss X received the Council’s final response to her complaint).
8. Miss X also complained that as her child has not been at school, they missed out on free school meals. We do not have powers to investigate this as the duty to provide school meals is with the school. We cannot consider the actions of schools, so this part of the complaint is out of our jurisdiction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered her views.
10. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Miss 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

Law and administrative background

Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans

12. A child 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.
13. Parents have a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal. This is only engaged once a decision not to assess, issue or amend a plan has been made and sent to the parent or a final EHC plan has been issued.
14. 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 SEND Regulations 2014. It says the process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 

Background

15. Miss X’s child (Y) has special educational needs (SEN). They were on roll at the “School”. They had difficulties regularly attending the School because of their SEN and high levels of anxiety in being separated from Miss X, resulting in risk of harm.

What happened – summary of key relevant events in the period considered

Education, Health and Care needs assessment and Miss X’s complaint

16. In mid-April 2024, the Council received Miss X’s EHC needs assessment request.
17. In early December 2024, Miss X formally complained to the Council about the delays as it missed statutory timeframes. In late January 2025, the Council confirmed it would issue an EHC Plan. Miss X gave her school preferences. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan.
18. Miss X complained to us. She added concerns of Y not receiving their free school meal entitlement. We advised her to complete the Council’s complaint process.
19. In mid-February 2025, the Council responded at Stage 1. It upheld her complaint and acknowledged the unacceptable EHC needs assessment delays, due to a lack of allocated caseworker. It apologised. It had experienced significant delays in processing requests, with high demand and increased staffing pressures. It was developing more efficient ways to meet timeliness for these assessments.
20. In mid-March 2025, Miss X escalated her complaint. She mentioned Y being in school for limited hours, and the funding for free school meals. In early June 2025, the Council issued a final EHC Plan.
21. In late July 2025, the Council responded at Stage 2. It apologised for the delay with its complaint response. It had now issued the final Plan for Y. It had made significant changes to the SEND service to address delays and improve communication. It offered £400 for Miss X’s distress with the delays.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

22. In response to my enquiries, the Council said Miss X’s original complaint to it focused on the delays with the final EHC Plan and free school meals entitlement, which it addressed, rather than Y missing education.
23. The Council said it and the School had given formal support to Y. This included from various teams and other professional input and a part-time timetable. It outlined an overview of the situation and actions taken around Y’s attendance. It said neither the School, family, or professionals working with Y suggested that alternative provision would be appropriate or recommended.

Analysis

24. The investigation is limited to considering the role of the Council. We cannot consider the actions of the School as they are not in our remit to investigate.

EHC needs assessment

25. The Council received Miss X’s request in April 2024. If a council decides to issue an EHC Plan, it should do this by 20 weeks. In this case, by the start of September 2024. The Council did not issue this until June 2025. This is a significant delay of nine months.
26. The Council accepted fault with the delays. It had taken steps to reduce these with changes in its SEND Service and case management system. This is appropriate action and will need time to embed.
27. I welcome the Council offering a personal remedy, but I do not consider £400 goes far enough to acknowledge the injustice. In line with our Guidance on Remedies, to recognise the impact of the delays with the EHC Plan, I have instead recommended £1,000 as below.

Y not attending school full time

28. Miss X’s complaint escalation request to the Council mentioned Y not being in school full time, but this was not part of her original complaint to it. For fairness, I asked the Council about this in my enquiries.
29. From evidence seen, the Council and School had meetings and regular reviews about Y’s case and part time hours. This also included the Council’s Autism Outreach service with individualised plans of support for Y. There were attempts to try to increase hours, with adjustments made and flexibility when needed. Notes acknowledged Y’s attendance would be variable and sporadic, with Y only being able to cope with short hours at points.
30. It appears the aim was to gradually reintegrate Y into school. This is positive and evidence shows efforts to build this up, depending on Y’s individual circumstances and needs. But I can also see these ongoing efforts did not result in full-time education in the period considered.
31. However, I am also mindful I have not seen evidence of Miss X requesting this or complaining about it. I am not persuaded her complaint relates to a lack of alternative provision. Rather, she generally felt a lack of support with Y’s attendance, with the impact of the prolonged EHC needs assessment which delayed formally identifying Y’s needs and provision for a formal Plan.
32. The Council says no-one suggested alternative provision for Y. However, it is for the Council to proactively consider its duty when needed, as Y continued not attending full time. It should have decided if it should arrange alternative provision, record the reasons at the time, and keep this under review. This is fault. But I cannot say, on balance, what the outcome of the Council’s decisions would have been had it done this, so it may not have led to a different outcome. There is some uncertainty here for Miss X here and I recommend a modest symbolic payment of £150 to recognise this.

Complaint handling

33. The Council did not handle Miss X’s complaint in line with its complaints policy. This says it will respond within 20 working days. The Stage 1 response took two months, and the Stage 2 response took four months. These delays (most notably at Stage 2) caused Miss X avoidable frustration and distress.

Back to top

Agreed Action

34. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions within one month of the final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X and Y for the injustice caused by the faults identified (in line with our guidance on making an effective apology); and
• Pay Miss X a symbolic payment of £1,150 to recognise the injustice.
35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman