Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about delay in the Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her child. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. We cannot investigate her complaint about the assessment process or the content of the final EHC Plan as she has appealed to the Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about delays in the Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment process for her child, Y. She also says the Council did not seek relevant professional advice as part of the assessment process and she disagrees with the content of the final EHC Plan.

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. The courts have established that if someone has appealed to the Tribunal, the law says we cannot investigate any matter which was part of, was connected to, or could have been part of, the appeal to the Tribunal. (R (on application of Milburn) v Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman [2023] EWCA Civ 207).
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. If we investigate this complaint, it is likely we would find fault causing injustice. This is because in its complaint response, the Council accepted it has not completed Y’s EHC needs assessment within the statutory timescales. It said the delay was due to the national shortage of Educational Psychologists.
9. To comply with the statutory timescales, the Council should have issued the final EHC Plan by 7 March 2025. It issued the plan on 31 July 2025, a delay of four and a half months. This delay is likely to have caused Ms X distress and it delayed her right of appeal.
10. We therefore invited the Council to remedy the injustice caused by paying Ms X £450, in recognition of the four and half month delay. The Council agreed to our recommendation.
11. We have recently upheld other complaints about delays with the Council completing EHC needs assessments due to the national shortage of Educational Psychologists. We are satisfied that the Council is actively taking steps to resolve this issue.
12. We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the EHC needs assessment process or the content of the plan. Ms X has appealed to the Tribunal, so we have no power to investigate these matters.  

Back to top

Agreed action

13. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will pay Ms X £450 as a remedy for the distress caused by the four and a half month delay in the EHC needs assessment process.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about delay in the Education, Health and Care needs assessment process. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. We cannot investigate her complaints about the assessment process or content of the final EHC Plan as she has appealed to the Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman