Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her child’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and education over a number of years. We find the Council at fault for delays in completing the annual review and reassessment process, failing to review the personal budget as required, missing direct payments, and failing to address the free school meal issue when Miss X raised it. These faults caused uncertainty about whether her child should have received additional provision, financial pressure for the family, and time and trouble for Miss X pursuing the matter. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X, and complete the EHC Plan process.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her child, Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and education over a number of years. In particular, she says the Council:
1. Failed to complete annual reviews of Y’s EHC Plan on time, or did not complete them at all;
2. Did not secure suitable alternative education for Y while they were out of school;
3. Failed to properly implement and review Y’s Education Otherwise Than at School (EOTAS) provision, including the associated personal budget; and
4. Failed to provide free school meal vouchers when Y was entitled to them.
2. Miss X says these failures have resulted in Y missing significant education and support and have had a detrimental impact on the health and financial circumstances of the whole family.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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

What I have and have not investigated

7. 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)
8. Although Miss X’s complaint relates to events beginning in 2017, she did not complain to us until July 2025. I have exercised discretion to investigate matters from September 2023, when the most recent final amended EHC Plan was issued. This is because the events since that date form part of a continuing sequence and investigating only part of the complaint could lead to an incomplete understanding of what happened. However, I have not investigated matters before September 2023 because Miss X was aware of those issues more than 12 months before complaining to us. For clarity, I have not investigated part (b) of Miss X’s complaint, or any elements of the other complaint matters that relate to events before September 2023. These issues are late complaints and there are no good reasons to investigate them.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Miss 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

Relevant law and legislation

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. 

Personal Budgets

12. A Personal Budget is the amount of money the council has identified it needs to pay to secure the provision in a child or young person’s EHC Plan. One way that councils can deliver a Personal Budget is through direct payments. These are cash payments made to the child’s parent or the young person so they can commission the provision in the EHC Plan themselves.

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. 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) 
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.

Reassessments of EHC Plans

15. The council must decide whether to conduct a reassessment of a child or young person’s EHC Plan if this is requested by the child’s parent, the young person or their educational placement. The council may also decide to complete a reassessment if it thinks one is necessary.
16. If the council agrees to an EHC needs reassessment, it has 14 weeks to issue the final EHC Plan from the date it agreed to reassess to the date it issues the final amended EHC Plan.

Free school meals and equivalent food provision

17. Free school meals help disadvantaged pupils engage with and benefit from education. The primary legislation for free school meals is the Education Act 1996 (the Act).
18. Section 512 of the Act places a duty on maintained schools, academies and free schools to provide free school meals (FSM) to eligible pupils aged 5 to 16 who meet the benefits-related criteria.
19. The Department for Education’s guidance “Free school meals: guidance for schools and local authorities”, first issued in 2018 and updated in March 2024, to include guidance on children receiving education otherwise than at school (EOTAS) and reasonable adjustments for disabled children.
20. The guidance says councils should consider providing equivalent food provision (EFP) where a child receiving EOTAS would meet the benefits-related eligibility criteria for FSM if they attended a maintained setting, and where providing meals alongside education would help the child benefit fully from that education. Councils should consider these cases individually and decide whether and how such provision should be made.

What happened

Background information

21. Y has had an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for several years.
22. In March 2023, the Council agreed to provide Y an interim Education Otherwise Than at School (EOTAS) package.
23. In May, the Council issued a final amended EHC Plan naming a school placement in Section I.
24. Miss X appealed to the SEND Tribunal and sought continuation of the EOTAS package Y had been receiving since March. During the appeal process the Council agreed that EOTAS should be named in the Plan.

Miss X’s complaint

25. In September 2023, the Council issued Y’s final amended EHC Plan naming EOTAS provision and included an itemised personal budget to be delivered through direct payments. The Plan said the personal budget would be reviewed within three months, then termly, and as part of the annual review process.
26. In January 2025, Y’s annual review meeting took place.
27. After the review meeting Miss X requested an increase to the personal budget. She provided a detailed breakdown of the costs and requested a sensory occupational therapy (OT) assessment.
28. In March, the Council issued a draft amended EHC Plan. The draft did not include any changes to the personal budget.
29. In the same month, the Council considered Miss X’s request for an increased personal budget and the request for a sensory OT assessment. The outcome of that consideration was that further information was required. The Council did agree to conduct a full reassessment of Y’s needs and obtain updated educational psychology (EP) advice.
30. In May, Miss X complained to the Council. She said:
• the draft EHC Plan did not include sufficient provision;
• the Council had failed to review Y’s personal budget termly as required;
• some provision had stopped because personal budget payments had not been made;
• she had personally funded some educational provision;
• the request she made in January 2025 for a review of the personal budget remained outstanding; and
• she had not received free school meal equivalent provision despite being eligible.
31. In June, the Council responded. It:
• apologised for the lack of provision;
• said Miss X’s request for an increased personal budget would be considered in mid-June;
• confirmed it had agreed to carry out a reassessment and was considering the sensory OT request;
• said it would finalise the EHC Plan once the personal budget decision had been made;
• acknowledged personal budget payments had not been made and offered £6,920 to cover missed payments; and
• offered a further £2,000 to recognise the considerable frustration and distress caused by poor communication and lack of progress with Y’s EOTAS package.
32. Mrs X escalated her complaint. She said the personal budget request and her request for free school meal equivalent support remained unresolved.
33. In July, the Council issued its final complaint response and said it had nothing further to add to its earlier response.
34. Mrs X then brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
35. Later in July 2025 a new EP assessment was completed. However, the Council has not yet issued a final amended EHC Plan.
36. In response to my enquiries, the Council considered Miss X’s request for free school meal equivalent provision. It accepted she was eligible and calculated that between March 2024 and March 2026 she should have received £1,152 in supermarket vouchers. It also confirmed she will continue to receive these until the end of Year 13.

My findings

Annual review and reassessment

37. The most recent final amended EHC Plan within the scope of this investigation was issued in September 2023.
38. The Council did not hold the next annual review meeting until January 2025. This was at least four months late and was fault.
39. Following the January 2025 review, the Council agreed to carry out a reassessment of Y’s needs in March 2025. When a council agrees to reassess an EHC Plan, it must complete the reassessment and issue a final amended Plan within 14 weeks. The Council agreed to reassess in March 2025. It should therefore have issued a final amended EHC Plan in June 2025.
40. The Council obtained updated educational psychology advice in July 2025 as part of the reassessment, but it has still not issued a final amended Plan. This delay in completing the reassessment process is fault.
41. This fault has caused injustice to Y and Miss X. The delay meant there was a prolonged period when the Council had not completed the process for reviewing whether Y’s provision should change or issuing a final amended Plan. I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, whether the Council would have increased Y’s provision within the annual review or reassessment. However, the Council’s failure to issue the Plan leaves uncertainty. It also delayed Miss X’s right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal about the contents of the Plan.
42. The Council also agreed to consider Mrs X’s request for a sensory OT assessment, however the Council is yet to provide a decision on the request. This delay is fault. This causes avoidable distress and uncertainty to Y and Miss X on whether Y could have been receiving specialist OT support.

Review EOTAS provision and personal budget

43. Y’s September 2023 EHC Plan states the personal budget would be reviewed within three months, termly thereafter, and as part of the annual review. The Council has not provided evidence that it carried out those reviews. This failure to review the personal budget in line with the Plan is fault.
44. The Council has already accepted that it failed to make the agreed direct payments. By June 2025, this had resulted in £6,920 of unpaid personal budget funding.
45. Miss X says the lack of payments meant some of Y’s provision stopped and she had to personally fund some education. The Council’s failure to make the payments and review the personal budget properly therefore caused financial pressure and uncertainty for the family. The Council has offered Miss X reimbursement of the missed personal budget payments which is an appropriate remedy.
46. Miss X also requested an increase to the personal budget in January 2025. The Council said it would consider the request but has not provided a decision.
47. I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, whether the Council would have increased the personal budget if it had considered the request properly or conducted the other reviews as required. However, the failure to make a decision has caused uncertainty about whether Y should have received additional provision.
48. In June 2025, the Council offered Miss X an additional £2000 for her and Y to recognise the frustration and distress caused by poor communication and lack of progress with Y’s EOTAS package. I have considered the Council’s remedy and find that this is suitable to remedy the distress, uncertainty and frustrated right of appeal caused by its delays

Free school meals

49. Miss X raised concerns with the Council that she had not received free school meal equivalent provision despite being eligible. The Council did not properly address this issue during its complaint handling. This was fault and meant Miss X had to spend additional time pursuing the matter.
50. During my investigation the Council reconsidered the issue and accepted that Miss X was eligible for free school meal equivalent support and has calculated the backdated support owed to her. I am satisfied this action appropriately remedies the injustice caused by the missed provision.

Back to top

Action

51. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within eight weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• Provide a separate apology to Miss X and Y, each in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• arrange an annual review of Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan. As part of this review, the Council should review the personal budget and Miss X’s request for a sensory occupational therapy assessment;
• pay Miss X £6920 to cover the missed Education Otherwise Than At School personal budget payments as previously offered in its June complaint response;
• pay Miss X £1,152 in backdated equivalent free school meal support;
• pay Miss X the £2000 remedy it offered in June 2025 to recognise the distress and frustration caused to her and Y; and
• pay Miss X £200 to recognise the time and trouble caused by the Council’s failure to properly consider and respond to all elements of her complaint.
52. Within three months of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• issue a new final EHC Plan within the relevant statutory timescales, taking account of the July 2025 educational psychology advice; and
• once the final Plan is issued, provide a remedy, in line with our Guidance on remedies, for any special educational provision or increased personal budget Y would have received sooner but for the delay. This remedy should cover the period from September 2024 until the date the final amended Plan is issued. The level of remedy may vary across this period depending on the provision Y should have been receiving at different stages.
53. I have not recommended further service improvements to address delays within the Council’s SEND service. This is because the Department for Education issued the Council with an Improvement Notice in July 2024 and it is currently working to implement the required actions. In addition, the Ombudsman has already made recommendations to the Council in other investigations about reducing delays, meeting statutory timescales for annual reviews, and improving its management of personal budgets. Those recommendations relate to the same issues identified in this case.
54. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman