Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed issuing its decision after an annual review of her child’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council did not issue its decision after the annual review meeting within statutory timescales. This frustrated Miss X. The Council will apologise.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council delayed issuing its decision after an annual review. Miss X said this frustrated her.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’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)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Miss X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft decision. I considered their comments before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

8. A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (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. 
9. The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews. The annual review begins with consulting the child’s parents or the young person and the educational placement. A review meeting must then take place. The process is only complete when the council issues its decision to amend, maintain or cease to maintain the EHC Plan. This must happen within four weeks of the meeting. (Section 20(10) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.176) 
10. If the council decides not to amend an EHC Plan or decides to cease to maintain it, it must inform the child’s parents or the young person of their right to appeal the decision to the tribunal.
11. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:

• description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan; and
• decision not to amend an EHC Plan following a review or reassessment.

What happened

12. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
13. Y has an EHC Plan. The Council issued the final plan in April 2024 naming the school Y attended, school B.
14. School B completed the annual review meeting in January 2025. School B noted Miss X asked for a change of placement as she did not feel school B provided the level of support for Y to meet her full potential. School B sent the paperwork to the Council two weeks after the meeting. It recommended the Council maintain the EHC Plan.
15. Miss X chased the Council in February 2025. She wanted an update on Y changing schools.
16. Miss X complained to the Council in March 2025. She complained the Council had not issued its decision after the annual review.
17. The Council consulted with Miss X’s preferred school, school C, a week later.
18. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at the end of March 2025. The Council said it was consulting with school C and would issue the decision within two weeks. The Council apologised for any uncertainty.
19. School C responded to the consultation two days later. School C said it could not offer Y a placement.
20. Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two at the start of April 2025. She said the Council said it would issue its decision within two weeks and it had not.
21. The Council issued its decision to maintain Y’s EHC Plan the following day.
22. The Council issued its final complaint response in May 2025. The Council acknowledged the delay issuing its decision after the annual review meeting and apologised.
23. Miss X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Miss X would like the Council to improve communication.
24. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted it did not issue its decision to maintain the EHC Plan within statutory timescales. The Council said Y did not miss any provision and Miss X did not appeal the EHC Plan.

My findings

25. Paragraph nine confirmed the Council must issue its decision after the annual review within four weeks. School B held the annual review meeting in January 2025. The Council should have issued its decision in February 2025. It issued its decision to maintain the EHC Plan in April 2025, a two-month delay.
26. The Ombudsman takes the view that councils must abide by the statutory and legislative requirements under the SEN legislation and guidance. The Council’s failure to meet the required timeframes here amounts to fault. This frustrated Miss X’s appeal right to the Tribunal.
27. Miss X did not appeal against the decision not to amend the EHC plan naming school B. The Council fault frustrated Miss X, but this did not lead to any missed education or plan provision for Y.

Back to top

Recommended action

28. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Miss X by the fault I have identified, the Council will take the following action within 4 weeks of this final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the frustration delaying issuing the decision after the annual review caused. 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.
29. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

30. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Miss X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman