Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to ensure alternative provision was in place for her son, Y, when he was unable to attend school. She said this meant her son missed out on provision listed in his Education, Health and Care Plan which affected his wellbeing and caused her stress and financial loss. We found the Council at fault and it has agreed to make a symbolic payment to Mrs X in recognition of the injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) failed to ensure alternative provision was in place for her son, Y, when he was unable to attend school. She said this meant her son missed out on provision listed in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan which affected his wellbeing and caused her stress and financial loss.

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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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 events from late May 2024, when Y’s final EHC Plan was issued, until August 2025 when Mrs X complained to us.
7. I have only investigated matters relating to the loss of educational provision for Y during this period. I have not considered whether the provision set out in B’s EHC Plan was appropriate. This is because it would be reasonable to expect Mrs X to use her right of appeal about any provision set out in the EHC Plan.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
10. 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

EHC Plan 

11. 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.
12. The Special Educational Need and Disabilities (SEND) code of practice (The Code) says provision should be in place from the date the final EHC Plan is issued. Where the provision is proposed by the council in a draft EHC Plan, the Council should be ready to secure that provision when the EHC Plan is finalised.

Reviewing EHC Plans

13. 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. Following the review meeting the council must issue a decision to either 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) 
14. Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.

Section 19 duty

15. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds that a child is unable to attend school because of a permanent exclusion, an illness, or for any other reason which make the school inaccessible to the child. The alternative educational provision must be suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and any special educational needs they have.

Establishing a section 19 duty

16. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.

Arranging person centred provision

17. If the council decides it must arrange alternative provision, it needs to arrange provision based on the child’s individual needs. It should also have a review process to ensure the provision remains in the child’s best interests. Councils can decide a child cannot cope with full-time provision, especially where the reason for their non-attendance is medical. When this happens, the Council should provide reasons for the amount of provision it arranges.
18. If a child has an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan the council also has an ongoing duty to arrange the support guaranteed by the Plan. However, this might not always be possible, such as where the SEN support is designed for the child’s normal classroom setting. Councils should also think about the steps needed to reintegrate the child back into their usual school setting, through ongoing conversations with relevant professionals and the parents.

Guide for practitioners

19. We publish good practice guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to identify and arrange alternative educational provision: Supporting children out of school (October 2025).

What happened

20. Y was attending a nursery school placement, with plans to start a mainstream primary school placement at School A in September 2024. The nursery school requested an EHC needs assessment and the Council issued a final EHC plan at the end of May 2024 naming School A in section I of the EHC Plan.
21. Y’s parents raised concerns to the Council about whether School A was able to meet Y’s needs in a mainstream setting. Mrs X said that they had requested that Y’s EHC Plan list the placement as specialist provision at School A. Mrs X did not raise an appeal with the Tribunal in relation to the placement listed on Y’s EHC Plan.
22. In September 2024, Y started at School A with a part-time timetable. Later that month, Y’s parents contacted the Council advising that Y was not receiving the support outlined in his EHC Plan. Mrs X said the school had advised that it was unable to provide the support listed in Y’s EHC Plan, and as a result Y stopped attending School A.
23. The Council held a meeting with Y’s parents in October 2024 to discuss their concerns about the placement at School A and options for a phased return to school.
24. Mrs X made a stage one complaint to the Council in October 2024. The Council responded in November 2024. It was satisfied that School A could meet the provision specified in the EHC plan. Mrs X asked for the complaint to be escalated to stage two.
25. School A told the Council in late October 2024 that Y was not attending school. In November and early December 2024, Y attended six half-day sessions at School A. This was intended as the start of a phased return to school for Y. The parents reported that initially this seemed to go well, but in the fourth week the placement broke down, and Y again stopped attending school. School A told the Council that Y was not attending in January 2025.
26. The Council held a review of Y’s EHC Plan in November 2024 and agreed to maintain Y’s EHC Plan with amendments. The Council responded to Mrs X’s stage two complaint in December 2024. It confirmed that parents can state which school they prefer, but said it needed to consult with schools to identify a suitable placement and could not guarantee that the final placement would be in a specialist setting.
27. The Council sent a copy of one school’s consultation response to Y’s parents in January 2025. Other than this, there is no evidence that the Council contacted Y’s parents in January and February 2025. Case notes show that between March and June 2025 the Council consulted with schools and contacted Y’s parents on several occasions to update them about the process. In June 2025 the Council issued an updated final EHC Plan for Y which named School B in section I. The Council contacted Y’s parents to confirm that his placement at School B would start in September 2025.

Analysis

Securing provision under an EHC Plan (section 42 duty)

28. Whether the placement listed on Y’s EHC Plan was suitable for Y is not a matter for this investigation, as it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to use her right of appeal about this matter.
29. Mrs X said that, once Y started at School A, he did not receive the special educational provision set out in section F of his EHC Plan. The Council initially was satisfied that the provision was in place when Y was in school. But he only attended part-time in September 2024, and again for some sessions in November and early December 2024. From January to July 2025 the Council was aware that Y was not attending school.
30. The Council has accepted that it did not make any alternative provision to meet the requirements of section F when Y was not attending school. The Council’s duty to secure EHC provision applies even where there is a dispute about the suitability of a placement. Any disagreement about the placement itself was appealable to the Tribunal and is not a matter for this investigation. I therefore find the Council at fault for failing to secure the provision set out in Y’s EHC Plan which caused Y to miss out on essential educational support.

Section 19 duty

31. The Council’s duty to arrange alternative provision starts when a child reaches compulsory school age, the term after the child reaches five years old. In this case the Council should have considered whether it had a duty under section 19 of the Education Act 1996 to arrange suitable alternative educational provision for Y after 31 December 2024.
32. The Council was aware Y was not attending school from January 2025 and that this absence was linked to his special educational needs and wellbeing. While councils can decide that a child cannot cope with full-time education, they must still consider and arrange provision that is suitable to the child’s needs and review this regularly. Despite this, the Council did not arrange any alternative provision and there is no evidence it considered its section 19 duty throughout the extended period Y was out of school for the spring and summer terms of 2025. This was fault which led to a loss of educational provision for Y.

Delay amending the EHC Plan

33. The Council reviewed Y’s EHC Plan in November 2024 and decided to amend the Plan. It therefore should have issued a final amended Plan in February 2025.
34. The Council issued a final amended Plan in June 2025, around 19 weeks beyond the statutory timescale. The Council has explained the delay was due to extended consultation with schools and difficulties identifying a suitable placement for Y. While I understand these challenges, they do not remove the Council’s responsibility to meet statutory timescales or to ensure interim provision is in place. This delay is fault, which caused uncertainty and contributed to Y missing out on educational provision during this time.

Poor communication

35. There is evidence the Council contacted Y’s parents on several occasions, particularly between March and June 2025 when it updated them about the school consultation process. However, the Council’s case records show that contact with Y’s parents was inconsistent. There is no evidence of any contact between January and March 2025, during a period when Y was not attending school and no educational provision was in place.
36. There is no specific requirement for councils to provide constant updates. However, we would expect a council to maintain appropriate communication during the EHC process and when a child is not attending school for an extended period. In this case, poor communication added to Mrs X’s uncertainty and frustration at a time when her son was without education and support. This is fault.

Remedy

37. When we find fault, we aim to put the person affected back in the position they would have been in had the fault not occurred. Where this is not possible, we may recommend a symbolic financial payment to recognise the injustice caused. In cases involving loss of educational provision, this includes recognising the impact on the child’s education, development and wellbeing.
38. In this case, Y received no education or alternative provision during the spring and summer terms. The delays and lack of alternative provision caused a significant loss of educational opportunity his first year of compulsory education. It caused Mrs X avoidable uncertainty and frustration over a prolonged period. Mrs X also said that she had to reduce her working hours to care for Y during this time, which led to financial loss.
39. The Council has previously told us about its ongoing work to address weaknesses in its SEND and alternative provision arrangements. This includes an action plan focused on improving oversight of attendance, clarifying responsibilities for section 19 provision for children with EHC Plans, and strengthening systems for monitoring and securing provision. I will therefore not recommend further service improvement actions in this decision.

Back to top

Action

40. In recognition of the injustice caused to Mrs X and Y, I recommend, within one month of the final decision, the Council should:
• Apologise to Mrs X and Y in accordance with our guidance on making an effective apology.
• Pay Mrs X £4000 (£2000 per term) in recognition of the loss of education to Y, and the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused by the delays and poor communication.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman