Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete her child’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment within the statutory timescales and failed to provide suitable education when her child was out of school. We find the Council at fault for delays in completing the Education, Health and Care process and for failing to act promptly under its section 19 duty to arrange alternative provision. These faults resulted in a loss of education for Y and caused avoidable distress and uncertainty for the family. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a financial payment to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete her child Y’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment within the statutory timescales.
2. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to provide Y with suitable alternative provision since October 2024.
3. Mrs X says without the EHC Plan, Y has been unable to attend school, and caused stress, worry, and financial pressures for the family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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)
6. 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

7. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mrs X 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

Timescales and process for EHC needs assessment 

9. 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).

Education, Health and Care Plan

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. 

Alternative provision

11. 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.
12. Councils must “make arrangements for the provision of suitable education at school or otherwise than at school for those children of compulsory school age who, by reason of illness, exclusion from school or otherwise, may not for any period receive suitable education unless such arrangements are made for them.” (Education Act 1996, section 19(1))
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. Where possible, the child’s health needs should be managed by the home school so that they can continue to be educated there with support, and without the need for the intervention of the local authority. However, as soon as it is clear that the home school can no longer support the child’s health needs and provide suitable education, the school should speak to the local authority about putting alternative provision in place.
16. There is no absolute legal deadline by which local authorities must start to arrange education for children with additional health needs. However, as soon as it is clear that a child will be away from school for 15 days or more because of their health needs, the local authority should arrange suitable alternative provision. The 15 days may be consecutive or over the course of a school year.
17. When a local authority arranges alternative education, that education should begin as soon as it is possible, and at the latest by the sixth day of the child’s absence from school.

What happened

18. In July 2024, Mrs X asked the Council to carry out an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment for her child, Y.
19. In August, the Council agreed to carry out the assessment.
20. In December, Y’s school requested alternative provision. The school explained it had tried various support strategies, including a part-time timetable, but Y had been absent since November.
21. Later that month, Mrs X complained to the Council about delays in completing Y’s EHC needs assessment.
22. In January 2025, the Council responded to the complaint. It upheld the complaint and apologised for the delay. It said the delay was due to a national shortage of Educational Psychologists (EP) and outlined the steps it was taking to address delays.
23. Shortly afterwards, the Council considered the school’s request for alternative provision. It decided Y was unable to attend school and arranged alternative provision through a pupil referral unit (PRU).
24. Mrs X was dissatisfied with the Council’s response and escalated her complaint. She said Y had been unable to attend school since November and the school had delayed requesting alternative provision because it wanted to try other support first. She also explained that, due to delays in obtaining EP advice, she had paid for a private assessment and sent the report to the Council. Mrs X asked the Council to use the private report and continue the assessment process. She also asked the Council to reimburse the cost of the report and provide compensation for Y’s missed education and the family’s distress, time and trouble.
25. In February, the Council issued its final complaint response. It said it would consider the private EP report but would still commission its own EP assessment to ensure consistency and quality of advice across the county. It confirmed it would not reimburse the cost of the private report. The Council said an EP had now been allocated and that advice was expected in March. It did not consider a further response necessary and closed the complaints process.
26. Later that month, the PRU met with Mrs X and Y and agreed provision would begin in March 2025, with a phased transition into the placement.
27. In March, the Council received the EP advice and shortly afterwards issued the draft EHC Plan.
28. In April, the Council issued Y’s final EHC Plan.

My findings

Delay in completing EHC needs assessment

29. The Council has accepted it did not complete Y’s EHC needs assessment within the statutory timescales.
30. The Council was required to issue Y’s final EHC Plan within 20 weeks of Mrs X’s request in July 2024. This meant the Plan should have been issued by late November 2024. However, the Council did not issue the final EHC Plan until April 2025. This represents a delay of approximately four and a half months and is fault.
31. The Council has shown the delay was caused by a national shortage of educational psychologists, but this does not remove its duty to comply with the statutory timescales. The delay caused Mrs X and Y uncertainty about Y’s educational support and contributed to the distress and frustration Mrs X describes. It also delayed Y having a finalised Plan confirming Y’s provision and placement.
32. I note that once the Council received the educational psychologist’s advice in March 2025, it progressed the matter promptly and issued the draft and then final EHC Plan within a short period.

Decision not to reimburse cost of private EP report

33. Mrs X chose to obtain a private educational psychologist’s assessment due to the delay in the Council securing its own advice. She did so without prior agreement from the Council and requested reimbursement afterwards.
34. The Council considered the private report but decided to commission its own educational psychologist’s advice to ensure consistency and quality of assessments across the local authority. It explained its reasons for this decision and confirmed it would not reimburse the cost of the private report.
35. Councils are not required to reimburse the cost of privately commissioned assessments obtained without prior agreement. As the Council did not rely on the private report in place of its own advice and gave clear reasons for its decision, I find no fault in its refusal to reimburse Mrs X.

Alternative provision

36. The Council became aware in December 2024 that Y had not been attending school since at least November 2024, and that the school’s attempts to support Y to return had not been successful. At that point, it had a duty under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 to consider whether Y was receiving suitable education and, if not, to arrange appropriate alternative provision.
37. The Council decided in mid-January 2025 that Y required alternative provision. Provision did not begin until March 2025.
38. Statutory guidance makes clear that where it is evident a child will be absent from school for 15 days or more, the local authority should arrange suitable alternative education as soon as possible, and at the latest by the sixth day of absence. While I acknowledge the Council was not fully aware of Y’s absence until December, once notified it should have acted more quickly to ensure suitable provision was in place. The delay between becoming aware of Y’s absence and the start of provision in March 2025 is fault.
39. This delay resulted in a further period during which Y was without suitable education, causing a loss of educational provision and avoidable uncertainty for the family.
40. Where fault results in a loss of education, we normally recommend a symbolic financial payment to recognise the impact of that loss. In reaching a view on the appropriate amount, I have considered Y’s individual needs, their ability to engage with education at the time, their stage in education, and the fact they received no alternative provision during this period. Taking these factors into account, I consider a payment of £450 per term of lost provision to be appropriate to acknowledge the injustice caused.

Back to top

Action

41. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mrs X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• pay Mrs X £450, to recognise the uncertainty and avoidable distress caused by the delay in obtaining Educational Psychology advice; and
• pay Mrs X £450, to recognise the lost educational provision for approximately one term.
42. I have not made any further recommendations regarding delays within the Council’s SEND service. This is because the Council has informed the Ombudsman of the steps it has taken to address these issues, including recruiting additional permanent Educational Psychologists to reduce assessment delays. In addition, in August 2025, since the events of this complaint, the Council provided an action plan setting out the improvements it is making to ensure alternative provision is arranged in a timely manner.
43. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

44. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman