Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council, in respect of her child B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan delayed holding the annual review, issuing an updated EHC Plan and putting the provision in place. We found the Council delayed holding and completing the annual review process, which caused Mrs X distress, uncertainty and financial hardship, and B to miss out on support. The Council has acknowledged fault and agreed to a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (the Council) did not provide support in the Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her child, B. She also complained about delays with the annual review process which prevented B being able to access support. She said there was a lack of communication from the Council, and she had to privately fund Speech and Language Therapy (SALT). This caused her distress, uncertainty, and financial hardship and B to miss out on essential support.

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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

4. I have considered B’s education from January 2024. This is when an annual review of B’s EHC Plan was due to take place and is a logical place to begin my investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

EHC Plans and annual reviews

7. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an 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.
8. 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. The process is only complete when the council issues its decision to amend, maintain or discontinue the EHC Plan. This must happen within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 
9. 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.

Personal Budgets

10. 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.
11. A child’s parent or the young person has the right to request a Personal Budget when the council has completed an EHC needs assessment and confirmed it will prepare an EHC Plan. They may also request a Personal Budget during a statutory review of an existing EHC Plan.
12. The final allocation of a Personal Budget must be sufficient to secure the agreed provision specified in the EHC Plan and must be set out as part of that provision.
13. If the council refuses a request for a direct payment, it must set out the reasons in writing and inform the child’s parent or the young person of their right to request a formal review of the decision.

What happened

14. B has an EHC Plan. An annual review of the Plan was due in January 2024, but did not take place until May 2024. The Council then failed to issue a meeting report or a notice to confirm whether it would maintain, amend or cease the Plan.
15. There is no evidence the Council contacted Mrs X between May and October 2024. In October 2024 Mrs X asked the Council for a copy of the EHC Plan, which she believed had been revised following the annual review meeting. The Council only then amended the Plan and sent it to Mrs X with an apology for the delay.
16. Mrs X complained to the Council in late October 2024. At the same time, Mrs X asked for a Personal Budget to arrange SALT. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint in December 2024. It apologised for the delays and confirmed it would arrange a Personal Budget. The Council formally agreed the Personal Budget in February 2025.
17. The Council issued a final EHC Plan in March 2025. This included SALT to be provided by appropriately trained school staff. However, B’s school does not employ a SALT Therapist and was unable to provide this support. This meant B was without any SALT provision at school from January 2024. Mrs X therefore paid for private SALT for B, which is now funded through the Personal Budget.
18. The Council, in response to my enquiries, acknowledged it would have included SALT as a provision on the EHC Plan had there not been delays. It is also likely the Council would have identified the need for a Personal Budget sooner, meaning Mrs X would not have had to pay privately for this support. This delay was fault which caused Mrs B financial hardship
19. The Council also said the delays were due to a high turnover of EHC Coordinators which resulted in a backlog and impacted its ability to schedule and conduct reviews. The Council has recently restructured its Special Educational Needs team and provided training to its staff. It says it is focused on improving timeliness in relation to EHC Plans and reviews.
20. The Council has also acknowledged there were unacceptable delays in completing B’s EHC annual review and issuing a final updated EHC Plan, which led to B missing out on support. In addition to the service improvements, the Council has offered to pay Mrs X a total of £2500 in recognition of the injustice caused to her and B.

Analysis

Annual Review

21. The Council delayed for nearly 13 weeks in holding the annual review meeting. This was fault. It then failed to issue any report about the outcome of the review, or to issue a draft amended EHC Plan, until October 2024, five months after the review meeting. This delay is also fault.
22. The Council should have sent a copy of the meeting report and a notice of its intent to amend the EHC Plan within 4 weeks of the review meeting. It should have then issued the amended EHC Plan within a further 8 weeks, by the end of August 2024. Not doing so caused Mrs X and B uncertainty and delayed the provision of any extra support. It also delayed the signing of the final EHC Plan along with the right to appeal against the content.

EHC Plan

23. The Council did not issue a final amended EHC Plan until March 2025, 10 months after the annual review meeting. It should have issued the final plan by the end of September 2024, a delay of six months in addition to the 13-week delay in holding the annual review meeting. This delay was fault which caused Mrs X and B distress, uncertainty and loss of education, specifically SALT provision. It also meant the process of setting up a Personal Budget was delayed and this caused financial hardship to Mrs X who was paying for SALT privately.

Communication

24. There is no evidence the Council contacted Mrs X after the annual review meeting in May 2024, causing her uncertainty and inconvenience. She had to contact the Council to prompt it to complete the annual review process and issue an amended EHC Plan. This was fault which caused Mrs X injustice.

Back to top

Action

25. I welcome the Council’s offer and am satisfied this remedy is satisfactory and in line with our Guidance on Remedies.
26. So, in recognition of the injustice caused to Mrs X and B, I recommend, within one month of the final decision, the Council should:
1. Apologise to Mrs X and B in accordance with our guidance on making an effective apology;
2. Pay Mrs X, on behalf of B, £1000 in recognition of the loss of educational provision;
3. Pay Mrs X £1000 in recognition of the delay in identifying the need for, and setting up, a Personal Budget to fund SALT for B; and
4. Pay Mrs X £500 in recognition of the avoidable inconvenience and uncertainty.
27. I am satisfied the Council has recently provided evidence of this restructure and training in relation to another complaint and therefore will not make any further recommendation for service improvement at this time.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman