Summary: The Council was at fault for the time taken to issue an Education, Health and Care Plan for Ms X’s child and for not putting in place suitable education when the child was out of school. This meant the child had to wait much longer than they should for support with their special educational needs and missed out on education they should have received. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise, make payments to recognise the loss of education, special educational provision and delays issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council also agreed to carry out a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
• Delayed finalising her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan after she asked for an assessment.
• Failed to put in place suitable alternative education for her child when they stopped attending school.
2. Ms X said her child has fallen behind in their education due to not receive suitable alternative provision and their mental health has worsened.

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 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)
4. 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)
5. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated whether the Council provided alternative education up until September 2025. At this time the Council put in place a package of education for Ms X’s child. If she is unhappy with the quality or suitability of this she should complain to the Council in the first instance.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
9. 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 found

Law and guidance

10. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an EHC Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections. We cannot direct changes to the sections about their needs, education, or the name of the educational placement. Only the Tribunal or the council can do this. 
11. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following:
• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks.
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable.
• If the council goes on to carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 weeks.
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks (unless certain specific circumstances apply);
12. Under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 councils have a duty to make arrangements for the provision of suitable education, at school or otherwise, for children who, because of illness or other reasons, may not receive suitable education unless such arrangements are made for them.
13. Suitable education means efficient education suitable to a child’s age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have. (Education Act 1996, section 19(6))
14. The education provided by the council must be full-time unless the council determines that full-time education would not be in the child’s best interests for reasons of the child’s physical or mental health. (Education Act 1996, section 3A and 3AA)
15. The law does not define full-time education but children with health needs should have provision which is equivalent to the education they would receive in school. If they receive one-to-one tuition, for example, the hours of face-to-face provision could be fewer as the provision is more concentrated. (Statutory guidance, ‘Ensuring a good education for children who cannot attend school because of health needs’)

What happened – alternative provision

16. Ms X’s child Y attended a mainstream primary school. They were due to start secondary school in September 2024.
17. In mid-February 2024, Ms X asked the Council to put in place alternative education for Y as they were no longer attending school. Email communication between the Council and Y’s school showed in February 2024, the Council said it would look at putting in place alternative provision for Y.
18. Communication between the Council and Ms X showed Ms X did not consider Y could engage with online education and Y had also not left the home for several weeks. As a result the Council agreed to look for tuition for Y at home.
19. The Council consulted with a provider in early May 2024 however the provider had an 8 week waiting list. As a result the Council found another provider to deliver tutoring at home for Y. This started in early June 2024 and Y received one hour per week.
20. In November 2024, the Council increased Y’s tuition to two hours per week.
21. The Council put in place a package of education for Y in September 2025. This consisted of 12 hours in total.

Findings

22. The Council was aware Y was not attending school from February 2024. Internal emails showed communication between Y’s school and the Council where the Council recognised Ms X had asked for section 19 provision and it agreed to look for something. There were delays putting provision in place for Y as it took the Council until early June 2024 to put in place some tutoring. This was fault.
23. While I recognise Ms X and the Council considered online and provision out of Y’s home would be unsuitable, the Council did not consult with an alternative provider until May 2024 despite being aware Y was out of school in February 2024.
24. It is also not clear why the Council decided to only put in place one hour per week of provision from June 2024. Y did not receive any further provision until November 2024, when the Council increased this to two hours per week.
25. After Ms X complained to the Council, it agreed to put in place a package of education for Y until it finalised Y’s EHC Plan. This was in April 2025. It took the Council a further five months to put in place a package of education for Y. This was fault.
26. I am satisfied Y has not received suitable education from February 2024 until September 2025. This amounts to four and a half terms. Our guidance on remedies say where fault has resulted in a loss of educational provision, we will usually recommend a remedy payment of between £900 and £2,400 per term to acknowledge the impact of that loss. In coming to a suitable figure I have considered that there was some provision in place for Y from June 2024. I have also considered Y was in a critical year of their education as this period overlapped the end of primary school and start of secondary school.

What happened – EHC needs assessment

27. On 5 February 2024, Ms X asked the Council to carry out an education, health and care needs assessment for Y.
28. In May 2024, the Council received advice from an educational psychologist (EP) and confirmed in June 2024 it would issue an EHC Plan for Y. At this time Y received counselling sessions from a counsellor who worked in their school. The school funded this until the end of the summer term but would not provide any sessions after this as Y would no longer be on the school roll. After the summer school term ended Ms X funded counselling sessions.
29. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan for Y in September 2024. Ms X provided the Council with comments on this shortly after.
30. Ms X made a formal complaint to the Council about its delays issuing Y’s EHC Plan. The Council provided its final response to Ms X’s complaint in April 2025. The Council recognised there had been delays issuing a final EHC Plan. The Council said it would review the draft EHC Plan and obtain new EP advice. The Council agreed it would put in place an interim package of support for Y while it finalised their EHC Plan. The Council offered Ms X £1,000 in recognition of the delays completing the assessment process.
31. The Council also agreed to pay a contribution to the weekly counselling sessions of £2,380. The Council explained in response to my enquiries that it felt this counselling was part of the support Y needed within their EHC Plan and it agreed to pay this to support Y accessing future education as Ms X felt this was the main barrier.
32. The Council obtained advice from an EP in June 2025 and issued a draft EHC Plan in August 2025.
33. The Council issued a final EHC Plan for Y on 1 December 2025. This included a package of Education Otherwise than at School (EOTAS) support for Y.

Findings

34. The Council was at fault for the time taken to issue Y’s EHC Plan. Ms X initially asked the Council for an assessment on 5 February 2024. The Council should have issued a final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of this date, so by 20 June 2024. It did not issue a final EHC Plan until 1 December 2025, some 17 months late.
35. After issuing a draft EHC Plan it decided it should review this and seek further advice from an EP. Once the Council received the new EP advice, in June 2025, it took a further six months to issue a final EHC Plan for Y.
36. These delays have had a significant impact on Y. Y has had to wait 17 months longer than they should have to receive a finalised EHC Plan with support. It took the Council four months to produce a draft EHC Plan after getting EP advice in May 2024 and then six months to produce a final EHC Plan after getting updated EP advice in June 2025.
37. The Council has recognised it was at fault here and offered Ms X £1,000 to acknowledge the delays completing the EHC assessment process. The Council also offered to pay a contribution towards the counselling sessions Ms X paid for as it believed this was part of the support Y needed. While this is welcomed and goes some way to remedy the injustice caused, I am satisfied there has been further injustice caused since the Council offered this remedy to Ms X in April 2025.
38. When the Council obtained the updated EP advice in June 2025 I am satisfied on balance that it would have known what provision to out in Y’s EHC Plan but it took it a further six months to finalise the EHC Plan. We normally expect Council’s to be able to finalise an EHC Plan 6-8 weeks after getting the EP advice. In this case if the Council had finalised the Plan within 6-8 weeks of getting the updated EP advice, Y would have received a final EHC Plan in August 2025. Therefore I am satisfied Y has missed out on four months of special educational provision. This is an injustice to Y.
39. The delays finalising Y’s EHC Plan have also had a significant impact on Ms X. She has not been able to formally challenge the content of any EHC Plan as no final EHC Plan was issued. In addition, Ms X has experienced anxiety and frustration caused by these delays from knowing her child was not getting the support they needed.

Back to top

Agreed Action

40. Within one month of my final decision, the Council agreed to carry out the following:
• Apologise to Ms X for the injustice caused by the above faults. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• If it has not done so already, pay Ms X £1,000 it previously offered through the complaints process to recognise the delays issuing a final EHC Plan.
• If it has not done so already pay Ms X £2,380 it previously offered through the complaints process as a contribution towards the costs of counselling she paid for.
• Pay Ms X £500 to recognise the loss of special educational provision to Y from August 2025 to December 2025.
• Pay Ms X £7,200 to recognise the loss of education to Y. I have calculated this at £1,600 per term for four and a half terms.
• Look at why there were such significant delays completing Y’s EHC Plan, particularly after getting EP advice. The Council should consider what steps it will take to improve its procedures to ensure such delays do not occur in future and report back to the Ombudsman with the changes it proposes to make.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman