Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing a reassessment of her child’s education and health needs and in issuing a final education and health care plan. This delayed her right of appeal and caused avoidable distress and uncertainty. We have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of an apology, symbolic payment and procedural review provide a suitable remedy together with the actions the Council had already taken to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council delayed completing a reassessment of her child’s education and health needs and in issuing a final education and health care plan. Mrs X says this delayed her right of appeal and caused avoidable distress and uncertainty.

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. 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)
4. 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

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

Background

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. 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) 
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. The council can refuse a request for a reassessment if less than six months have passed since a previous EHC needs assessment. It can also refuse a request if it does not think it is necessary, for example because it does not feel a child or young person’s needs have changed significantly.
13. The council must tell the child’s parent or the young person whether it will complete an EHC needs reassessment within 15 calendar days of receiving the request. If the decision is not to reassess, the council must also provide information about the right to appeal that decision to the Tribunal.
14. 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.

What happened

15. The following is a summary of key events. It does not include everything that happened.
16. Mrs X’s child was attending a mainstream school and had an EHC Plan. There was an annual review of the plan in October 2024 at which amendments to it and a change of placement were requested.
17. The Council’s Placement and Provision Panel considered the request and a letter was issued to Mrs X and the school on 30 October 2024 confirming the panel was unable to agree the request and that the EHC Plan would therefore be maintained. The allocated SEND caseworker also advised Mrs X of this decision by telephone the following day.
18. Mrs X sought an interim annual review in December 2024. The interim review meeting was held with Mrs X on 6 February 2025 at which she stated a preference for a particular school.
19. The Council consulted with several schools included Mrs X’s preference at the end of May 2025.
20. A final amended plan was issued on 31 July 2025.
21. Mrs X’s preferred school is now named in Section I of the current EHC Plan and her child has started a transition to the placement.
22. In responding to the Ombudsman, the Council has acknowledged that delay in agreeing and progressing the reassessment following the interim review contributed to a delay in Mrs X being able to progress matters to Tribunal. It noted the parental request for an interim annual review made in December 2024 and that it had accepted an interim review was appropriate but the meeting did not take place until February 2025. This represented a delay at the outset of the process.
23. Following the interim annual review, the Council was required to notify Mrs X within four weeks whether it intended to amend or maintain the EHC Plan. Where a decision is taken to amend, the Council should then complete the amendment process within a further eight weeks. The Council has accepted these actions did not progress within the statutory timescales. This is fault.
24. The Council has further explained that the delay was compounded by the allocated SEN Caseworker being absent during this period. Although Mrs X was informed of this absence in March 2025, following the Caseworker’s return, the Council accepts that appropriate contingency arrangements were not put in place to ensure continuity of case management.
25. As a result, there was a delay between March and May 2025 before consultations with educational settings were issued. This consultation delay further stalled progress towards amending the EHC Plan and contributed to a lack of clarity about next steps. During this period, communication with Mrs X was limited, which caused avoidable uncertainty and frustration.
26. The Council accepts that these delays fell below the standard of service expected and has offered an apology. The Council recognises that the earlier delay in agreeing the reassessment, combined with the extended delay in issuing consultations between March and May 2025, restricted Mrs X’s ability to pursue her appeal in a timely way and contributed to the overall delay in achieving resolution.
27. The Council has also advised the Ombudsman of the steps it has taken since the period relevant to this complaint to strengthen its SEND service. This includes the recruitment of additional SEND Caseworkers and the delivery of additional training for staff, all aimed at improving responsiveness, communication and continuity for parents and families. The Ombudsman would welcome this action.
28. During the complaint process, the Council accepted that some email correspondence from Mrs X did not receive a response. The officer has since left the Council, and as a result, the Council is unable to retrieve or verify copies of those emails. The Council has acknowledged that it should have systems in place to ensure that correspondence is appropriately monitored and responded to, regardless of individual staff availability or subsequent staff changes. The failure to respond to Mrs X’s emails contributed to avoidable frustration and uncertainty. The Council has apologised for this failure.

Back to top

Action

29. The Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of my final decision:
1. write to Mrs X to apologise for the delay in the review process and poor communication;
2. make a symbolic payment to Mrs X of £500 to acknowledge her avoidable uncertainty and frustration; and
3. review its procedures for EHC Plan reviews, reminding staff to ensure they obtain review documentation, issue notices within timescales, approach school settings in good time, issue the plan within the timescales and keep parents informed.
30. 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.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman