Summary: Dr X complained the Council delayed finalising her daughter’s Education, Health and Care plan and failed to ensure suitable education was provided during this period. We have found the Council was at fault. It caused a delay of thirteen months. This likely meant Dr X’s daughter missed out on the education and support she needed. The Council has agreed to take action to address the injustice.

The complaint

1. Dr X complains the Council failed to carry out an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her daughter, Y within the statutory timescales. She says the delay left her daughter without education and caused significant distress and disruption to the family.

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(1), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Dr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Dr X 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

Statutory Guidance

7. A child with special educational needs may have an EHC plan. This document describes the arrangements which should be made to meet the child’s needs.
8. Statutory government guidance (the ‘SEND code of practice’) says that, within six weeks of receiving a request for an EHC needs assessment, the council must write to the child’s parent and tell them whether it will do an assessment.
9. If the council goes on to issue an EHC plan, the whole process (from the assessment request to the plan being issued) must take no more than 20 weeks.
10. When a child (of compulsory age) cannot go to school, the council must find out why. If there is a duty for it to act, it must make alternative arrangements to provide a suitable education. The council has a statutory duty under Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 to provide full-time education where a child cannot attend school because of exclusion, medical reasons, or ‘otherwise’. 
11. The only exception to this is under section 19(3AA) of the 1996 Act, where the physical or mental health of the child is such that full-time education would not be in his/her best interests. In such circumstances, the council can arrange education on a part-time basis, based on the child’s best interests.

What happened

12. In May 2024, the Council received a request from Dr X for an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her daughter, Y. The Council agreed to carry out the assessment in June 2024.
13. In November 2024, Dr X complained to the Council about delays in completing the EHC needs assessment.
14. Because Y was not attending school due to anxiety, the school arranged support from a reintegration service aimed at helping young people return to education. This support was commissioned for ten weeks and ended late Feb/early March.
15. In January 2025, the Council upheld Dr X’s complaint. It explained that a shortage of Educational Psychologists was affecting its ability to complete EHC needs assessments within statutory timescales.
16. In April 2025, Y began attending an alternative provision for one hour a week, with the intention that her hours would gradually increase.
17. Y’s difficulties in accessing education were linked to the difficulties she experienced leaving the family home, it does not appear that the Council explored the option of home tuition or online learning.
18. In May 2025, Dr X asked for her complaint to be escalated because she continued to experience delays and a lack of follow-up communication.
19. In June 2025 the Council completed the EHC needs assessment.
20. In July 2025, the Council upheld the Stage 2 complaint. It said the Educational Psychologist aimed to complete their report that month so the Council could finalise the EHC plan. The Council also offered Dr X £150 as a symbolic payment for the difficulties she had experienced.
21. In September 2025, Y’s attendance at the alternative provision increased to six hours a week.
22. The Council issued the final EHC plan in October 2025.

My findings

23. The statutory timescale for issuing EHC plans is clear and non-negotiable. The Council should have issued Y’s plan by October 2024. The plan was issued in October 2025. This was fault.
24. The Council has explained the reason for the delay. I accept that there have been national problems recruiting educational psychologists to assess children’s special educational needs. However, this does not change the statutory timescale, or the injustice caused to Y from the delay.
25. I The delay in Y’s EHC plan caused her to miss out on some support, and caused Dr X inconvenience, including having to make a complaint to the Council and later to us.
26. Although Y was not able to attend school due to anxiety, there were prolonged gaps in her education, and she was not receiving a full-time education during this period.
27. The Council has a statutory duty to ensure that children who cannot attend school receive suitable full-time education, unless they cannot access such an education because of their physical or mental health needs. Although Y struggled to leave the house, there is no evidence that options such as online learning or home tuition were explored for Y. This was fault by the Council, which caused an injustice to Y as she lost the opportunity to engage in a more significant package of education.

Back to top

Action

28. Within five weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
• Write to Dr X, apologising for the delay in issuing Y’s EHC plan and the lack of suitable education. We publish guidance which sets out what we expect an effective apology to look like. The Council will consider this guidance when writing to Dr X.
• Make a symbolic payment of £1,300 to acknowledge and remedy the delay beyond the statutory timeframe in finalising the EHC plan.
• Make a symbolic payment of £1,000 to reflect Y’s loss of educational provision between March 2025 and July 2025.
29. The Council will provide us with evidence it has done these things.

Back to top

Decision

30. The Council was at fault. This caused injustice to Y, which the Council will now take action to address.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman