Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about whether an Education Health and Care Plan meets a child’s needs as it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Tribunal. We will not investigate her complaint about whether specified education provision was given, as it is unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council stopped providing support required by an Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan). Mrs X says an amended EHC Plan does not meet B’s needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X, which included the Council replies to her.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. B has an EHC Plan. In it, up to August 2024, it specified hours of individual Speech and Language Therapy (SALT). In August 2024 the Council issued an amended EHC Plan which removed the SALT. Mrs X then discovered B had not received the SALT for some time. She complained to the Council. It could not tell her when the SALT had stopped or how much SALT B had received over the previous years. Mrs X is not happy with the amended EHC Plan. She believes it does not meet B’s needs.
7. We will not investigate whether the August 2024 amended EHC Plan meets B’s needs because it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to appeal to the Tribunal.
8. The Council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools and others are providing all the special educational provision in section F for every pupil with an EHC Plan.
9. Mrs X did not question whether the SALT had been provided until August 2024. She has provided notes from the annual reviews which do not show it was raised then either. The annual review notes show B’s progress was considered. It is unlikely our investigation could find fault without evidence the Council knew the SALT was not being provided.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Tribunal. And we are unlikely to find Council fault in a lack of SALT provision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman