Summary: The Council is at fault for delay providing an Educational Psychologist report and delay completing the Educational, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for Ms M’s child. The Council should make a payment to Ms M to remedy the distress caused by the delay completing the EHC Plan.

The complaint

1. Ms M complained the Council delayed in the Education, Health and Care (EHC) planning process for her child, C. She said this meant C is not in full-time education and is falling behind his peers educationally and socially. Ms M said she took time off work to care for her child and has privately funded therapy sessions. This had a financial impact on Ms M and caused her emotional distress. She wants a financial remedy.

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. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

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

Relevant legislation

The Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan 

7. 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. 
8. 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. 
• If the council decides not to conduct an EHC needs assessment it must give the child’s parent or young person information about their right to appeal to the Tribunal.
• 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);  
• Councils must give the child’s parent or the young person 15 days to comment on a draft EHC Plan and express a preference for an educational placement.
• The council must consult with the parent or young person’s preferred educational placement who should respond within 15 calendar days.
  (Delete irrelevant bullet points)

9. As part of the assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND Regulation 6(1)). This includes: 

• the child’s educational placement; 
• medical advice and information from health care professionals involved with the child; 
• psychological advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP); 
• social care advice and information; 
• advice and information from any person requested by the parent or young person, where the council considers it reasonable; and 
• any other advice and information the council considers appropriate for a satisfactory assessment. 

10. The council must not seek further advice if it already has advice and “the person providing the advice, the local authority and the child’s parent or the young person are all satisfied that it is sufficient for the assessment process”. In making this decision the council and the person providing the advice should ensure the advice remains current.  
11. Those consulted have a maximum of six weeks to provide the advice. 
12. Following completion of an EHC needs assessment, if the Council decides an EHC Plan is not necessary it must notify the child's parents or the young person of its decision and of their right to appeal that decision.

Alternative provision

13. Councils must arrange suitable education at school or elsewhere for pupils who are out of school because of exclusion, illness or for other reasons, if they would not receive suitable education without such arrangements. [The provision generally should be full-time unless it is not in the child’s interests.] (Education Act 1996, section 19). We refer to this as section 19 or alternative education provision.
14. This applies to all children of compulsory school age living in the local council area, whether or not they are on the roll of a school. (Statutory guidance ‘Alternative Provision’ January 2013)
15. The DfE guidance (Working together to improve school attendance) states all pupils of compulsory school age are entitled to a full-time education. In very exceptional circumstances there may be a need for a temporary part-time timetable to meet a pupil’s individual needs. For example where a medical condition prevents a pupil from attending full-time education and a part-time timetable is considered as part of a re-integration package. A part-time timetable must not be treated as a long-term solution. 
16. Schools should notify the local authority of any cases where a child is accessing reduced/part-time education arrangements. Our focus report, “Out of school…out of mind?”, says councils should keep all cases of part-time education under review with a view to increasing it if a child's capacity to learn increases.

What happened

17. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
18. C attended the nursery at a mainstream primary school (School A) full time.
19. C attended reception and year one at School A. From January 2024, School A reduced C’s timetable. From April 2024, C attended school part time two days a week and accessed alternative provision totalling 12.5 hours, funded by the school, on the other three days.
20. Ms M asked the Council to do an EHC needs assessment for C in June 2024. The Council agreed.
21. Ms M removed C from School A in January 2025 and placed him at a new school, School B.
22. School B excluded C from school in March 2025. The Council funded the 12.5 hours alternative provision and said it would increase this to 15 hours each week when C was ready.
23. The EP provided their report in May 2025.
24. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan in July 2025. Ms M was not happy with the draft and suggested changes to the EHC Plan. The Council made the changes to the EHC Plan in late July. Ms M said she was happy with the updated Plan. The Council has not yet finalised the Plan.
25. From October 2025, the Council also provided therapeutic alternative provision as well as the 15 hours already provided. The Council provided around 23 hours provision each week altogether.
26. Ms M said she is happy with the alternative provision and the increase in hours. She said it is going well.

The complaint

27. Ms M complained about delays in the EHC needs assessment to the Council in February 2025.
28. The Council issued a stage one response in February 2025 and a stage two response in April 2025.
29. The stage two response upheld the complaint about the delay in the Educational Psychologist (EP) report.
30. The Council issued a stage three response in June 2025. It apologised for the delay in providing the EP report and the impact this had on completing the EHC Needs Assessment which it had not completed within the statutory timescales. The Council fully upheld the complaint.
31. The Council offered a financial remedy of £500 in recognition of the avoidable distress the delay in the EHC needs assessment caused Ms M and her family.
32. The Council said it had made several service improvements. It explained it is reviewing staffing and resources which includes appointing EPs and support staff, monitoring processes and improving communication with parents.
33. Ms M complained to us in June 2025. She said her child still does not have EHC Plan and the Council did not provide this within the statutory timescales.

Analysis

Delay in Educational Psychologist (EP) report

34. The Council agreed to assess C in July 2024. It should have prepared the EP report within six weeks of agreeing to assess, this should have been September 2024. The EP completed their report in May 2025. This is a delay of roughly eight months. This was fault which the Council accepted in its complaint response and apologised.

Delay in the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment (EHCNA)

35. The delay providing the EP report contributed towards the Council’s delay completing the EHC needs assessment and the EHC Plan. When a council agrees to complete an EHCNA, it should finalise the EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the request. Ms M asked for an assessment in July 2024. The Council should have finalised the EHC Plan in November 2024. The Council has still not finalised the EHC Plan. This was a 16-month delay up to March 2026. This is fault which is continuing.
36. In its complaint response, the Council accepted it has delayed completing the EHCNA and EHC Plan and apologised.
37. The Council offered Ms M £500 for the distress caused by the delay in the EHCNA process. Ms M told me she had not accepted this offer as it was not enough.
38. C still does not have an EHC Plan. This is fault.

Alternative Provision

39. Councils must arrange suitable education at school or elsewhere for pupils who are out of school because of exclusion. School B excluded C in March 2025 and C does not currently have a school placement. From the time of the exclusion, C received 12.5 hours of alternative provision which the Council increased to 15 when he was able to engage. The Council also provided therapeutic alternative provision from October 2025. This was a total of around 23 hours of alternative provision. In conversation with Ms M, she told me she is happy with the provision and said it is going well.
40. While C has not attended school in person, he has received around 23 hours of provision. The law does not define full-time education, but this is considered to be between 22 and 25 hours. When provision is one-to-one, fewer hours may be suitable, giving the increased intensity of learning. While C started on 12.5 hours of alternative education, the Council kept this under review and increased the provision as C could engage, he is now receiving full-time hours. C has received enough provision and continues to do so. I do not find fault with how the Council provided alternative provision of education for C.

Summary of fault causing injustice

41. The Council was at fault for delay issuing the EP report. It is also at fault for delay completing the EHC Plan which is still outstanding. This has caused distress to Ms M. It has also delayed her right of appeal to the Tribunal if she does not agree with the contents of the EHC Plan.
42. The Council has made several service improvements. I do not consider I need to make any further recommendations for service improvements.

Back to top

Action

43. Within four weeks, the Council should:
• Finalise the EHC Plan.
• Pay Ms M £800 for the distress caused by the delay in the EP report. This is calculated at £100 per month of delay.
• Pay Ms M an additional £1,000 for the distress caused by the continued delay in finalising the EHC Plan after the EP report was completed. This is calculated at £100 per month of delay from the date the EP report was completed to March 2026.
• Continue to pay Ms M £100 per month of continued delay until the EHC Plan is finalised, up to a maximum of six months from March 2026. If the EHC Plan is not completed within six months, the case should be referred back to the Ombudsman.
44. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice which the Council agreed to remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman