Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council delayed carrying out an Education Health and Care needs assessment for a child. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint by making a suitable payment to the complainant to remedy the injustice this caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the Council has delayed completing an Education Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her child. She says her child was out of education whilst the Council completed its assessment.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
3. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
6. 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The Council allocated a school to Mrs X’s child via the school admissions process. The Council issued an EHC Plan naming the same school. Mrs X disagrees that the school named can meet her child’s needs and has appealed to the SEND Tribunal.
10. If we were to investigate this complaint it is likely that we would find fault. This is because the Council delayed completing its EHC needs assessment by around six months. It has apologised to Mrs X and says the delay was partly due to the national shortage of Educational Psychologists.
11. We have recently upheld other complaints about delays with the Council completing EHC needs assessments due to the national shortage of Educational Psychologists and we are satisfied that the Council is taking steps to resolve this issue and so have therefore not recommended any further recommendations in regard to this point. 
12. However, the delays have caused Mrs X distress in the form of frustration and uncertainty.
13. I therefore asked the Council to make a payment to Mrs X of £600 within one month to remedy the distress this has caused to date. To its credit, the Council agreed.
14. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that her child went without education prior to the issuing of the EHC Plan. This is because the Council identified a placement through its school admissions process and considered that it could meet her child’s needs. It is unlikely we’d find fault with the Council in this regard.
15. I cannot investigate the education provision for Mrs X’s child since the Council has issued a final EHC Plan. This is because Mrs X has used her right of appeal against the school named by the Council, and this places the matter out of our jurisdiction. The provision in place whilst the appeal is considered is not separable from the appeal itself.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the matter by providing a suitable remedy.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman