Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaint about delays in the Education, Health and Care process regarding his child, Y. The Council has already apologised to Mr X for the distress and uncertainty caused. The Council recently agreed to make service improvements as part of another investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about delays in the Education, Health and Care needs process regarding his child, Y.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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).
4. 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.
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X has a child, Y. Mr X asked the Council to conduct an EHC needs assessment of Y. The Council refused. Mr X appealed the decision to the SEND Tribunal.
9. In early October 2024 the Tribunal ordered the Council to conduct an EHC needs assessment of Y. The Council conducted the assessment and decided to make an EHC Plan for Y.
10. To comply with SEND Regulation 44 the Council should have made the final EHC Plan within 14 weeks of the SEND Tribunal’s order, by mid-January 2025. However, it did not make the final EHC Plan until mid-March 2025.
11. Mr X complained to the Council. He said the reason the Council failed to finalise the EHC Plan was due to a disagreement about funding for the school. Mr X said that this was not a reason in law to delay the final EHC Plan.
12. The Council responded to Mr X. It upheld his complaint and apologised for the distress and uncertainty caused by the approximate eight-week delay. It explained about improvements it was making to its services.
13. In response to other recent investigations by the Ombudsman the Council has provided us with its SEND improvement plan. In another recent investigation it agreed to remind officers about the Council’s duties in adhering to the statutory timescales when completing EHC needs assessments.

Analysis

14. The Council upheld Mr X’s complaint about the delays in finalising Y’s EHC Plan in line with the statutory timescales. It apologised to Mr X and explained about changes it is making to its services.
15. The Council has also agreed to recent recommendations by the Ombudsman and has provided evidence of its SEND improvement plan.
16. Consequently, while we uphold this complaint, we will not investigate because the Council has apologised to Mr X, which is in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, and it is already making the required improvements to its services. An investigation is unlikely to achieve anything further.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We upheld Mr X’s complaint because the Council accepted fault during its complaints process, provided a suitable remedy for the distress and uncertainty caused, and is improving its services for others.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman