Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to secure her child’s Section F Education, Health and Care Plan provision since issuing the plan in September 2024. We did not find fault with the Council and found no significant personal injustice to Ms X or her child.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to secure her child’s Section F Education, Health and Care Plan provision since issuing the plan in September 2024.

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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended).
3. 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).
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(i), as amended).
5. 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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have not considered any matters about a dispute over delivery of Occupational Therapy provision. This provision was not in Ms X’s child’s September 2024 EHC plan. Ms X exercised her appeal right to the SEND Tribunal resulting in a Consent Order to amend her child’s EHC Plan in June 2025. Any matters about this appeal are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigation because Ms X exercised her the appeal right to the SEND Tribunal.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Ms X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Rules and regulations

EHC Plans

10. An Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) is a legal document which sets out a description of a child's needs (what he or she can and cannot do). It says what needs to be done to meet those needs by education, health and social care.
11. Once the Council completes the EHCP 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.

Council complaints policy

12. The Council operates a two stage complaints process.
13. The Council says it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and provided a complaint response within 10 working of the acknowledgement. The Council says it may take 20 working days in complex matters.
14. If a person is dissatisfied with the response at Stage 1, they can request consideration of a complaint at Stage 2. The Council says it will acknowledge a response at Stage 2 within 5 working days and provide a complaint response within 20 working days. However, for more complex case the Council can take up to 40 days to provide a response.

What happened

15. On 3 September 2024, the Council issued Ms X’s child’s, who I shall refer to as Y, EHC Plan. Within this EHC Plan the Council detailed the full Section F provision it considered Y should receive. Among other provisions, the Council detailed that Y should receive:
• 25 hours of support throughout all learning activities. At first provided 1:1 but then working towards small group teaching and working independently. This provision to be delivered by a range of adults.
• For lessons Y has not attended, Y should receive daily short (e.g. 15-20 minute) 1:1 catch-up sessions for 6-12 weeks to fill any gaps in knowledge.
• Y should access a weekly small group (e.g. 2-3 peers (1:3 or 1:4 ratio)) study skills intervention totalling 30 minutes per week delivered by an appropriately trained adult. This was a time limited intervention of 6-12 weeks.
• Y to access a weekly small group (e.g. 2-3 (1:3 or 1:4 ratio) independent life skills intervention totalling 30 minutes per week delivered by an appropriately trained adult (e.g. ELSA). This was a time limited intervention of 6-12 weeks.
• Weekly sessions in a small group (e.g. 2-3 (1:3 or 1:4 ratio) totalling at least an hour a week to support development of social communication and interaction skills. This should follow a structured package/intervention (such as Lego therapy). Facilitated by adult trained in ELSA. This was a time limited intervention of 6-12 weeks.
• Y to be able to access a calm, positive, structured learning environment with clear boundaries, routines and expectations.
• Two daily 1:1 check-ins for 10 minutes with key adult (flexible depending on how day is presented but once in the morning and once at the end of the day).
• Weekly emotional literacy sessions in a small group (e.g. 2-3 (1:3 or 1:4 ratio) totalling at least an hour delivered by a suitably trained adult (e.g ELSA). This was a time limited intervention of 6-12 weeks.
• 20 minutes per day for “down time” where Y can engage in her own personal interest,
• SENCo/teacher to review Section F provision termly unless otherwise stated.
16. On 21 October 2024, Ms X complained to the Council that Y’s school was not implementing the full Section F provision detailed in her child’s EHC Plan. Ms X asked the Council to intervene to ensure the school put this provision in place.
17. The Council issued a Stage 1 complaint response on 25 October 2024. The Council said its SEND officer would be liaising with Y’s school to ensure the full provision detailed in Y’s EHC Plan was in place.
18. Ms X responded on 4 November 2024 to advise this did not address the underlying issuing about the provision not being in place.
19. On 5 November 2024, the Council contacted Y’s school to advise it needed to discuss Y’s EHC Plan provision.
20. The Council confirmed it would not escalate Ms X’s complaint to Stage 2 on 6 November 2024 because this would not provide a meaningful response at this time. The Council explained the school was closed for half-term so they had not yet had opportunity to meet with the school to discuss Ms X’s concerns. The Council promised an update by 15 November 2024.
21. On 13 November 2024, the Council met with Y’s school to discuss Y’s Section F EHC Plan provision. Y’s school told the Council it had put Y’s EHC Plan provision in place but on occasion staff sickness could impact on Y’s provision. The Council updated Ms X the following day to advise the school had reassured it Y’s EHC Plan provision was in place.
22. On 19 November 2024, Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at Stage 2 of its complaints process. The Council promised a response within 20 working days.
23. The Council provided a Stage 2 complaint response on 16 December 2024. The Council said it had reviewed this matter and detailed the provision it considered was in place for Y. The Council said Y was working at age related expectations in most areas and the school and itself would continue to review Y’s provision to ensure it was meting Y’s needs.
24. The Council held two further meetings with Y’s school in January 2025 to discuss Y’s EHC Plan provision.

Analysis

Checking EHC Plan provision

25. A council can delegate delivery of a child’s Section F EHC Plan to other organisations, such as schools, but it ultimately remains responsible for ensuring any delegated bodies deliver the provision. This does not mean a council needs to keep a watching brief on the delegated bodies.
26. But, it should check in at least yearly on the delivery of the provision, usually through annual reviews, and investigate complaints by a person that provision is not being delivered.
27. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to investigate the actions of schools or question its delivery of Y’s EHC Plan. The Ombudsman can investigate if a council has ensured EHC Plan provision has been secured as specified in an EHC Plan. However, the day-to-day details of delivery, which in this instance is for schools to decide, and any interpretation about how this should be delivered, is outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman. This is a matter for the SEND Tribunal.
28. The Council has evidenced it provided the agreed funding to Y’s school for delivery of the EHC Plan provision. The Council acted properly to ensure suitable funding was in place for Y’s provisions; I do not find fault.
29. Ms X raised concerns with the Council on 21 October 2024 that Y’s School was not providing the EHC Plan provision detailed in Y’s EHC Plan. I cannot find fault with the Council before 21 October 2024 for any failure of the school to deliver Y’s EHC Plan. This is because the Council would have been unaware that any provision was allegedly not in place.
30. The Council acted correctly to investigate whether Y’s School was providing the provision as detailed in Y’s EHC plan. The Council met with Y’s school on 13 November 2024 who told it the provision was in place. Given the half-term break, the Council took about two weeks to arrange this meeting with the school and confirm with it that provision was in place. I cannot find fault with the Council’s actions from 21 October 2024 to 13 November 2024 as it acted appropriately and promptly to Ms X’s contact.
31. Following this, Ms X contacted the Council again on 19 November 2024 to repeat concerns the EHC Plan provision was not in place. The Council arranged follow up meetings with Y’s school in January 2025 to check Y’s EHC Plan provision. I do not find fault with the actions of the Council.

Injustice to Y

32. While the Ombudsman cannot investigate the nuance of the delivery of a child’s EHC Plan provision by a school, we can assess if a school has broadly delivered provision in line with the EHC Plan. This is for the purpose of fulfilling the Council’s duty to ensure provision is secured.
33. Much of Y’s EHC Plan provision was time limited for a set number of weeks. It is important to consider that Y’s school could provide this provision at any point over the academic year. The school would not need to provide all these time limited provisions immediately following production of the EHC Plan. Y would only need to have received this provision over the course of the existence of the EHC Plan, until its review and renewal, to fulfil the EHC Plan.
34. Y’s school has provided the Council, as part of the Ombudsman’s investigation, with evidence of it securing the provision disputed by Ms X in paragraph 15. This evidence shows:
• The school provided 1 to 1 support consistently for Y since January 2025 through to the end of term. The EHC Plan detailed that this support should be reduced over time to get Y working independently. The school kept this 1 to 1 provision in place until at least June 2025 and agreed with Y during the annual review meeting for Y’s EHC Plan for this to start reducing. The school has accepted in the first term there were occasions if failed to secure this provision because of staff illness, this was not a consistent failure to secure the provision.
• The school provided two terms worth of catch-up sessions from January 2025 to the end of the school year. This exceeded the 6-12 weeks outlined in the EHC Plan. The school incorporated the study skill sessions within this provision.
• The annual review meeting notes from June 2025 confirmed the school had provided life skills and social skills sessions merged into one provision for Y. The school incorporated this weekly into Y’s timetable; exceeding the 6 to 12 weeks detailed.
• The school provided access to the library for Y in October 2024. When this did not work the school provided access to a workroom in the Learning Support Centre. The school provided access to a calm learning environment fulfilling the EHC Plan provision. Delivery beyond this is at the discretion of the school.
• During the annual review meeting in June 2025, Ms X confirmed the check-ins have been occurring and said these were important for Y. The school also confirmed how it was providing these check-ins.
• ELSA sessions were completed on 7 February 2025, 12 February 2025, 14 March 2025, 28 March 2025, 25 April 2025, 13 June 2025 and 18 June 2025. This was confirmed by Ms X within the June 2025 annual review meeting notes. These seven sessions fulfil the EHC Plan provision.
• The school has shown timetabled time for Y to explore their own interests and access down-time and a generalised permission to take movement breaks when Y needs.
• The school has shown it reviewed Y’s Section F EHC Plan termly with the first review completed on 8 January 2025 reviewing the past term.
35. It is not for the Ombudsman to question the school’s interpretation of the delivery of the EHC Plan or the nuance over the details of this delivery. Based on the evidence provided by Y’s school to the Council, Y’s EHC Plan provision has been put in place, albeit with some initial delays in getting some provision going. As such, there is no significant personal injustice to Y.

Complaint handling

36. Ms X lodged her first complaint with the Council on 21 October 2024 which the Council acknowledged on 22 October and provided a Stage 1 complaint response to on 25 October 2024.
37. The Council has followed its complaints procedure and provided a Stage 1 response within the timescales detailed. I do not find fault with the Council.
38. I do not find fault with the Council advising Ms X in November 2024 that it needed to discuss the matter with Y’s school first. The Council promised a response date to Ms X and met this timescale. The Council has acted suitably and I do not find fault.
39. Following Ms X’s request for consideration of her complaint at Stage 2 on 19 November 2024, the Council acknowledged this request the same date. The Council had until 17 December 2024 to provide a Stage 2 complaint response and did so on 16 December 2024. The Council has again met its complaint timescales; I do not find fault.

Back to top

Decision

40. I have completed my investigation as there was no fault by the Council and no injustice to Ms X or Y.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman