Summary: We found fault with the Council failing to provide suitable education for Miss X’s child from April 2024 to November 2024. We also found fault with the Council failing to provide the full Education, Health and Care Plan provision from April 2024 until the end of the academic year 2024/2025. We also found fault with the Council delaying outside the statutory timescales when reviewing Miss X’s child’s Education, Health and Care Plan, delays in complaint handling and failing to complete suitable safe and well checks. This caused inconvenience, distress and frustration for Miss X. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and provide symbolic payments to recognise the injustice caused by its fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council named “mainstream” as her child’s educational setting in their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan despite it agreeing to source a package of Education Otherwise Than At School (EOTAS). Miss X says her child has not attended school since 2022.
2. Miss X complained the Council failed to deliver her child’s EHC Plan provision since its production in April 2024.
3. Miss X also complained the Council failed to complete safeguarding checks on her child while they were out of school.
4. Miss X said the matter caused her distress and frustration. Miss X said her child missed education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
7. 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)
8. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
9. 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)
10. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
11. 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

12. I have investigated Miss X complaint from April 2024 until September 2025.
13. Miss X approached the Ombudsman with her complaint in August 2025. The Ombudsman can normally only look at matters 12 months back from when a person brings a complaint to our attention, unless there is good reason otherwise. I consider there is good reason to extend the timescales of my investigation to April 2024 because this is the date the Council produced Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan.
14. The Ombudsman cannot normally investigate a complaint if a person has an appeal right to a tribunal about the same matter. This is the case for the contents of the Education, Health and Care Plan the Council produced in July 2025, including the school placement named. I have investigated Miss X’s concerns about the education provided from April 2024 because the Council told Miss X it would arrange Education Otherwise Than At School (EOTAS) for her child. This meant, Miss X lost the opportunity exercise her appeal rights about the educational placement named in this plan because of the information from the Council.
15. I have ended my investigation from September 2025. This is because Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2025 and the Council produced an amended Final Education, Health and Care Plan in July 2025. This Final Education, Health and Care Plan named a new school placement from September 2025. Miss X had appeal rights available to her for the new Education, Health and Care Plan and has not raised a formal complaint about matters from September 2025 onwards with the Council before bringing her complaint to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman must give a council opportunity to address a complaint before we investigate.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

16. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
17. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Rules and regulations

EHC Plan 

18. 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. 
19. Once the Council completes the EHC Plan it has a legal duty to deliver the educational and social care provision set out in the plan. The local health care provider will have the duty to deliver the health care provision.
20. The Ombudsman can look at any failure by the Council to deliver the provision within an EHC Plan.
21. 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.
22. 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.

Section 19 duty

23. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

Establishing a section 19 duty

24. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.

Good practice guidance

25. We publish good practice guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to identify and arrange alternative educational provision: Supporting children out of school (October 2025)
26. Our guidance says that councils should:

• consider all the reasons for a child’s absence from school, and make a written evidence-based decision about whether it will arrange alternative education provision;
• communicate this decision as a matter of good practice to parents and where it decides not to arrange alternative education tell parents the expectations about school attendance, and the potential consequences for continued absences;
• ensure the provision meets the individual needs of the child where it decides to arrange alternative education and explain its reasons for providing a part-time education if it decides the child cannot cope with full time provision;
• keep all cases of part-time education under review with a view to increasing when the child is able;
• work with parents and schools to draw up plans to reintegrate children to their normal educational setting as soon as possible, reviewing and amending plans as necessary; and
• ensure effective channels of communication between parents, internal teams, and external bodies (such as schools, and the NHS) so that issues are dealt with promptly by the right people, and that any complaints are identified and responded to under the relevant policy.

27. Where councils arrange for schools or other bodies to carry out their functions on their behalf, the council remains responsible. Therefore, councils should retain oversight and control to ensure their duties are properly fulfilled.

Council complaints process

28. The Council uses a two-stage complaints process. At stage one the Council says it will provide a response within ten working days after acknowledging a complaint.
29. If a person is dissatisfied with the stage one complaint response they can request consideration of their complaint at stage two. The Council says it will provide a response at stage two within twenty working days of acknowledgement.

What happened

30. In April 2024, the Council produced the first EHC Plan for Miss X’s child, Y. The EHC Plan confirmed the Council had not found a suitable school placement for Y and stated this in Section I. The Council outlined the full Section F provision to be provided for Y including some provision that could only be provided in a school setting.
31. Following production of the EHC Plan, the Council told Miss X it had not named a school placement so it could remove Y from enrolment with their current school, which Y was not attending. The Council told Miss X it would create a plan for EOTAS for Y and would be submitting a request for tutoring for Y.
32. In May 2024, Y’s previous school removed Y from enrolment.
33. In October 2024, the Council decided to put in place 1:1 Alternative Provision of education for Y for three days each week. The Council provided Miss X with log in details for online provision as a trial period in the middle of October 2024 and confirmed that Y was safe and well. Y did not access the online provision.
34. At the end of October 2024, the Council appointed a tutor to deliver 1:1 provision for Y. The tutor liaised with Miss X until mid-November 2024 to agree to what provision to put in place. Miss X told the tutor she did not want tutoring in the home to keep separation of home and learning for Y. Miss X told the tutor she believed Y would engage with online tuition but Y was too anxious for in person learning. Miss X agreed for the tutor to meet Y twice a week for one hour sessions in the library. The Council confirmed with Miss X that Y could access up to ten hours provision with the tutor but would start with two hours each week as per Miss X’s request and online learning.
35. The Council provided Miss X with the information about how to access the online learning and Y started to meet with the tutor from mid-November 2024. During the first meeting with the tutor, they agreed to reduce the sessions to once per week to provide work for Y to complete over the forthcoming week. Miss X told the Council that Y refused to access the online learning.
36. In December 2024, the Council declined specialist provision for Y and said Y should access education in a mainstream school.
37. The Council reviewed Y’s access to education and confirmed Y was accessing sessions once per week and confirmed this was in line with Miss X’s wishes because of Y’s anxiety. The Council confirmed the tutor completed safe and well checks weekly.
38. Miss X and the Council liaised about Y’s access to tuition and the decision to decline a specialist school placement in December 2024 and January 2025. Miss X said the Council told her it would provide EOTAS or a specialist school placement. The Council apologised for any previous misinformation in April 2024. The Council said it had now decided Y should access education in a mainstream school and meanwhile had offered ten hour per week of tuition at the local library.
39. In January 2025, Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council. Miss X said:
• The Council had provided poor communication since it produced Y’s EHC Plan in April 2024.
• The Council mislead her into believing it was sourcing EOTAS and a specialist school placement for Y preventing her from exercising her appeal rights to the tribunal.
• The Council failed to provide any education for Y until November 2024.
• The Alternative Provision of education in place for Y since November 2024 has been inadequate.
40. The Council issued a stage one complaint response at the end of January 2025. The Council said:
• It decided in April 2024 that it would provide EOTAS for Y once it removed Y from enrolment at their school placement.
• It acknowledged it failed to communicate with Y from April 2024 until September 2024, failed to make an earlier referral for interim home tuition for Y and failed to complete safe and well checks.
• It considered mainstream education is the most suitable for Y and no longer considered EOTAS appropriate for Y.
• It would complete an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan and continue to offer ten hours of tuition each week at the library.
41. Miss X sought consideration of her complaint at stage two in February 2025. Miss X said:
• The Council acknowledged it failed to provide suitable education or the provision from Y’s EHC Plan but has not advised how it intends to correct this.
• The Council did not start providing education for Y until November 2024 and disputed the Council completed any safeguarding checks putting Y at risk.
• She continued to dispute the suitability of mainstream education for Y.
42. In February 2025, the Council acknowledged Miss X’s stage two complaint and promised a response within twenty working days. The Council also held an annual review of Y's EHC Plan and issued a decision to amend Y's EHC Plan.
43. In March 2025, Y’s tutor provided a termly report to the Council. This report confirmed Y had attended eight out of eleven sessions offered but noted Y was not making progress as hoped and they needed to continue to try to engage Y in sessions.
44. The Council issued a stage two complaint response in March 2025. The Council said:
• It acknowledged it did not complete safe and well checks and had provided training to the caseworker about this.
• It was in contact with Miss X about arranging tuition for Y since the end of October 2024. The Council said it at first offered online tuition and later changed this to provision at the local library.
• It had offered ten hours per week tuition for Y but Miss X had declined this meaning it changed the offer to a weekly session in line with Miss X’s wishes. The Council offered to increase the provision if Miss X wanted.
• It had now agreed to name a specialist setting for Y and would do so in production of the Final EHC Plan for Y.
45. In July 2025, the Council produced an amended Final EHC Plan for Y. This Final EHC Plan named a specialist setting for Y from September 2025.
46. The Council continued to offer weekly sessions for Y with Y attending nine out the sixteen sessions offered to the end of the academic year.
47. Y started to attend the specialist setting in September 2025.

Analysis

Provision of education and EHC Plan

48. When the Council produced Y’s EHC Plan in April 2024, it had a duty to provide the full EHC Plan provision outlined in the plan. As part of Y’s EHC Plan, the Council also decided to remove Y from enrolment at their educational placement. This meant, the Council also had a duty to provide education for Y while they did not have a suitable educational placement available to them.
49. The Council did not provide any educational opportunities for Y or any EHC Plan provision from April 2024 until mid-October 2024. This was fault.
50. From mid-October 2024, the Council offered online provision for Y. However, the Council did not provide any support for this online provision, did not check to find out if Y was accessing this provision and did not provide any of Y’s EHC Plan provision; this was fault.
51. The Council started the process of arranging 1:1 tuition for Y at the end of October 2024. The home tutor, acting for the Council, liaised with Miss X and started provision from mid-November 2024. The reason for the delay from the end of October 2024 until mid-November 2024 was because Miss X and Y were unwell and not because of fault by the Council.
52. The Council proposed ten hours of in person tuition for Y but Miss X requested this was only one hour each week in the local library. The Council adapted the home tuition offer for Y based on Miss X’s request to try to meet Y’s needs. I do not find fault with the Council for this.
53. The Council continued to keep ten hours of tuition on offer for Y should Miss X agree to an increase of provision from mid-November 2024 until the end of the academic year. Throughout this time, the Council kept oversight of the tuition through weekly feedback reports from the tutor and reiterated to Miss X on various occasions it could increase this provision should Miss X wish. There is no evidence Miss X agreed to an increase in the provision and Y did not fully engage with the provision on offer, missing many sessions.
54. I do not find fault with the Council’s offer of Alternative Provision of education for Y from the end of October 2024 to the end of the academic year.
55. While this Alternative Provision of education offer from the Council fulfilled some of Y’s EHC Plan provision, this did not fulfil the full provision outlined in Y’s EHC Plan. The Council not delivering the full EHC Plan provision for Y was still fault.
56. The Council’s fault caused Y to miss suitable education from April 2024 to the end of October 2024 including access to all Y’s EHC Plan provision. This amounted to one and a half terms of education.
57. From the start of November 2024 to the end of the academic year, the Council had on offer suitable Alternative Provision of education for Y and kept this under review. I do not find fault with the Council that Miss X and Y chose not to take up this offer of education. However, the Council did not provide access to all Y’s EHC Plan provision during this time.
58. Our guidance on remedies for a loss of educational provision recommends a payment of between £900 and £2,400 per term to acknowledge the impact of that loss. The exact figure should be based on the impact on the child. This should take into account factors such as the amount of provision put in place and a child’s individual needs.
59. I have considered Y’s individual circumstances, including the impact on both Y’s access to suitable education and EHC Plan provision. I consider the Council should pay Miss X a total of £4,500 as a symbolic payment for Y’s missed education and EHC Plan provision.

Safe and well checks

60. The Council has acknowledged in its complaint response it failed to complete safe and well checks of Y from April 2024 until October 2024. The Council has already taken suitable action to provide training to the caseworker responsible for these failed checks. While the Council was at fault for not completing the safe and well checks, this did not cause and injustice to Miss X or Y. This is because Miss X was keeping Y safe and well.
61. From October 2024, the Council completed regular safe and well checks of Y through either the home tutor or caseworker. I do not find fault with the Council’s actions from October 2024.

EHC Plan annual review

62. The Council produced the first EHC Plan for Y in April 2024. This meant it needed to complete an annual review meeting and confirm its intention to maintain, amend or cease Y’s EHC Plan by April 2025. The Council completed this action in February 2025 meaning it met the statutory timescales and I do not find fault.
63. The Council had a total of twelve weeks to issue an amended Final EHC Plan for Y following the annual review meeting in February 2025. The Council should have produced an amended Final EHC Plan for Y by the end of May 2025. The Council did not produce a Final EHC Plan for a further two months, until July 2025. This delay was fault. This fault would have caused distress and inconvenience to Miss X and delayed her appeal rights to the tribunal.

Complaint handling

64. The Council failed to respond to Miss X’s complaint within its complaint timescales at either stage one or stage two. Overall, the Council delayed by just under three weeks combined across both complaint responses; this was fault. This fault would have caused Miss X frustration and inconvenience.

Back to top

Action

65. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Council will:
• Provide an apology to Miss X for the injustice caused by the failure to provide suitable education or EHC Plan provision for Y, the delays in completing the review of Y’s EHC Plan outside the statutory timescales and delays in handling her complaint. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Provide a symbolic payment to Miss X of £4,500 in recognition of Y’s missed education and EHC Plan provision from April 2024 until the end of the 2024/2025 academic year caused by the fault of the Council.
• Provide a symbolic payment of £200 in recognition of the frustration, distress and inconvenience caused by the Council’s EHC Plan annual review delays outside the statutory timescales and complaint handling delays.
66. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

67. There was fault leading to injustice. As the Council has agreed to my recommendations, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman