Summary: We found fault with the Council not suitably investigating Mr X’s concerns about the lack of one-to-one Education, Health and Care Plan provision in place for his child on his first contact. We also found fault with the Council not meeting its response timescales at stage one of Mr X’s complaint. The Council’s actions caused uncertainty, distress and frustration to Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and provide a symbolic financial gesture for the injustice caused by its fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to provide the correct funding to their child’s school for their Education, Health and Care Plan provision and failed to ensure the provision was in place since September 2024. Mr X says because of this, their child’s school has failed to provide the full Education, Health and Care Plan provision.
2. Mr X also complained the Council delayed handling of his complaint requiring them to repeatedly chase the Council for a response.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
7. 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)
8. 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

9. I have investigated Mr X’s complaint about his child’s access to education, including their Education, Health and Care Plan provision, from September 2024 until the end of September 2025.
10. I have not investigated any concerns about the educational placement the Council named in the Education, Health and Care Plan. 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 tribunal is the appropriate body to consider any dispute about the educational placement in a child’s Education, Health and Care Plan.
11. I have also not investigated Mr X’s complaint after September 2025 because the Council issued its final complaint response in August 2025 and carried out promised actions in September 2025. Anything after September 2025 would be the subject of a new complaint. The Ombudsman must give the Council opportunity to address any new complaint before we investigate.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
13. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered all comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Rules and regulations

EHC Plan 

14. 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. 
15. The council has a duty to make sure the child or young person receives the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC Plan (Section 42 Children and Families Act). The Courts have said the duty to arrange this provision is owed personally to the child and is non-delegable. This means if the council asks another organisation to make the provision and that organisation fails to do so, the council remains liable (R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62), (R v North Tyneside Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 135)  
16. We accept it is not practical for councils to keep a ‘watching brief’ on whether schools and others are providing all the special educational provision in section F for every pupil with an EHC Plan. We consider councils should be able to demonstrate appropriate oversight in gathering information to fulfil their legal duty. At a minimum we expect them to have systems in place to: 

• check the special educational provision is in place when a new or amended EHC Plan is issued or there is a change in educational placement; 
• check the provision at least annually during the EHC review process; and 
• quickly investigate and act on complaints or concerns raised that the provision is not in place at any time. 

Section 19 duty

17. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that the council 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.
18. Government guidance on a council’s section 19 duties recommends councils arrange education for a child from the sixth day of absence when a child is absent for non-medical reasons.

Council complaints policy

19. The Council uses a two-stage complaints process.
20. At stage one, the Council says it aims to provide a full response within fifteen working days of the date the Council received the complaint. The Council outlines if it needs to extend this timescale it will tell a complainant about this.
21. If a person is dissatisfied with the Council’s response at stage one, they can ask for consideration of their complaint at stage two. The Council says it aims to provide a response at stage two within twenty-five working days from the date of receipt. Again, the Council says it will keep someone informed about any extensions if needed.

What happened

22. In March 2023, the Council agreed an uplift in funding for Mr X’s child’s, Y’s, EHC Plan provision with Y’s school. The Council confirmed this funding, in addition to the school’s notional contribution, would meet Y’s needs outlined in their EHC Plan.
23. In August 2024, the Council produced an amended final EHC Plan for Y. Within Section F of this EHC Plan the Council confirmed Y would receive one-to-one support at all times throughout the school day.
24. In November 2024, a Family Network Plan meeting was held with Mr X, the school and the Council Family Support Practitioner in which Mr X raised concerns about a lack of one-to-one provision for Y. Following this meeting, Mr X contacted Y’s school to raise concerns it was not providing one-to-one support at all times of the day as outlined in Y’s EHC Plan. Mr X copied the Council into this contact. The school responded to Mr X and the Council to advise it was providing one-to-one support for Y.
25. Mr X continued to liaise with Y’s school, but not the Council, in December 2024 about Y’s achievement in school. Mr X did not raise concerns about the lack of provision in place. In January 2025, a further Family Network Plan meeting was held. No concerns were raised in this meeting surrounding the lack of EHC Plan provision for Y.
26. At the end of February 2025, Mr X provided feedback in response to the Council issuing a draft EHC Plan for Y. Mr X said the school had raised concerns they cannot meet Y’s full needs and requested a new Educational Psychologist assessment of Y.
27. In March 2025, the Council produced an updated final EHC Plan for Y. This updated plan confirmed Y would be starting at a new educational setting in September 2025 but kept provision of one-to-one support at all times of the school day.
28. A final Family Network Plan meeting was held at the end of April 2025. Y’s school noted in this meeting that there was insufficient funding for Y to have one-to-one. The Family Support Practitioner confirmed this should have been in place as was in Y’s EHC Plan and this needs to be investigated.
29. In June 2025, Mr X spoke with the school and EHC Plan coordinator about transition planning for Y’s move in schools in September 2025. This included planning for how Y’s one-to-one support would be put in place and questions about what funding would be in place for Y’s EHC Plan provision. Mr X noted concerns about how the school had delivered one-to-one provision this last academic year stating this had been shared provision due to lack of funding.
30. In July 2025, Mr X raised a formal complaint with the Council. Mr X said:
• He considered Y needed higher funding than currently awarded to meet their needs outlined in the EHC Plan.
• Y’s school has consistently not fulfilled the one-to-one provision throughout the school day from Y’s EHC Plan. Mr X said this support has been through a classroom teaching assistant and not one-to-one.
31. The Council discussed Y with the Special Educational Needs and Disability Co-ordinator (SENDco) for Y’s current school and new school placement in September 2025. The SENDco confirmed it has provided one-to-one support for Y during his time at the school. The SENDco provided a Graduated Provision Map detailing how this support was in place and would be in place moving forwards in the new setting. The Council provided advice to the school and confirmed it would follow up again with Y’s new school in September 2025, once it re-opened following the summer holidays. The Council asked the school to consider what support it had in place and what with advice or support it might need from the Council, including the potential for extra funding.
32. Mr X chased the Council for a complaint response at the start of August 2025. The Council provided a stage one complaint response the next working day. The Council said:
• Y’s school had submitted a Graduated Provision Map which helps the Council to decide appropriate funding for a child.
• It had been working with Y’s school to review Y’s provision and ensure this was reflective of Y’s EHC Plan.
• It would continue to work with Y’s school to ensure suitable provision was in place for Y.
33. Mr X responded to the Council’s stage one response. Mr X said:
• He did not consider Y’s school has been providing the correct support for Y.
• He wanted to know what funding and provision had been requested for Y at the new setting from September 2025 and how the Council and school had agreed for this to be provided.
• He wanted details about who was involved in discussions and why he had not been invited to take part in these discussions.
• He wanted the Council to explore Section 19 alternative provision of education for Y and had requested this in February 2025 but not heard anything since. Mr X said Y was showing school refusal and avoidance characteristics.
34. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s contact and promised an update within ten working days. The Council provided an update as promised within ten working days and apologised it could not give a substantive response to his questions. The Council officer said they would look to provide a further update on return from annual leave at the start of September 2025.
35. Mr X chased the Council for a response later in August 2025 and contacted the new school to enquire about what provision it had in place for Y for when they started in September 2025.
36. At the end of August 2025, the Council provided a stage two complaint response to Mr X and directed Mr X to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. The Council said:
• One-to-one support was in place for Y in the last school year.
• It will be contacting Y’s school in September 2025 to discuss if it needs any extra support to fulfil Y’s EHC Plan.
• It does not publish and share specific funding with parents but says it works with schools to ensure they have adequate and appropriate funding in place to meet a child’s needs.
• It offers termly meetings to discuss provision for all children with schools and there is opportunity for the school to raise concerns about Y’s provision at these.
• It will look to hold an early annual review of Y’s EHC plan in the autumn term.
37. The Council held a meeting with Mr at the end of August 2025. The Council said its SEND advisory would be contacting the school to ensure sufficient support was in place and discussed the complaint response including funding, support and the EHC Plan annual review.
38. At the start of September 2025, Y’s school told Mr X how it would be providing Y’s support from the start of term, on 3 September 2025. The school confirmed its planned one-to-one support for Y was also the classroom assistant. Mr X told the school and Council the current plan of support was not one-to-one and he would not be sending Y to the school until this was sorted. The Council, school and Mr X liaised about the education and support for Y.
39. On 4 September 2025, Y’s school changed the one-to-one support plan and shared this with Mr X who agreed with this proposal and sent Y to school on 5 September 2025.
40. The Council attended Y’s school on 5 September 2025 to observe Y and discuss support with the school. The Council arranged an annual review for Y’s EHC Plan for 24 September 2025. This resulted in the Council producing an updated EHC Plan for Y in January 2026.

Analysis

One-to-one provision in the academic year 2024/2025

41. Y’s EHC Plan was specific that Y should receive one-to-one support at all times of the school day. This support did not need the same member of staff to provide this at all times but must be one-to-one.
42. We do not expect the Council to keep a watching brief of the delivery of delegated EHC Plan provisions for all children with EHC Plans in their area. However, should a person raise concerns about provision not being delivered, we expect the Council to investigate this.
43. The first evidence of contact from Mr X to raise concerns that Y was not receiving their one-to-one support was in November 2024. At this time, Mr X raised this with the school directly who told Mr X it was in place. The Council was copied into this contact. The Council did not take any action to investigate or act on Mr X’s contacts in November 2024. While it was copied into an email from the school advising the provision was in place, it did not take any steps to verify this or make any formal written decision about why it did not need to investigate. The Council’s inaction in November 2024 was fault.
44. From November 2024 to July 2025, Mr X was in regular contact with the school about Y. In addition to this, Mr X was in contact with the Council’s EHC Plan Coordinator, in February 2025, and Family Support Practitioner, in January 2025 and April 2025. As part of Mr X’s contacts with the Council officers, Mr X raised concerns about the lack of suitable support in place for Y. At the start of 2025, the Council also completed an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan in which it verified the need for the one-to-one provision to continue.
45. Despite Mr X’s ongoing concerns, the Council failed to take suitable steps to verify if Y’s EHC Plan provision was in place. This is despite the Family Support Practitioner confirming in April 2025 that investigation was needed into whether the correct one-to-one support was in place. While the Council was involved with Mr X and Y, through the EHC Plan annual review process, the failure to suitably check Mr X’s concerns about whether the EHC Plan was in place was fault.

One-to-one provision from July 2025

46. Mr X raised a complaint with the Council about the lack of one-to-one provision at the end of the 2024/2025 academic year. The Council acted suitably to meet with the school and verify this provision had been in place. The Council took the correct steps in July 2025 to investigate Mr X’s concerns, and I do not find fault.
47. The Council also ensured it had plans in place to verify the continuation of the one-to-one provision when Y moved to their next educational placement in September 2025. The Council provided the relevant information to Y’s new school for September 2025 (through the EHC Plan) to ensure they knew what provision to put in place. The Council also planned meetings with this school for September 2025 to review delivery of this provision. The Council took appropriate steps, and I do not find fault.
48. Y’s school did not have one-to-one support which met Mr X’s expectations ready for the first day of term. However, following input from the Council, the school ensured this was in place for the third day of term. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to investigate the actions of schools so I cannot address its actions. But, I do not find fault with the Council’s role through its communication with the school to ensure the provision was in place as soon as possible with minimal impact on Y’s access to education. The Council also took suitable steps to verify this provision twice in September 2025 through both an arranged meeting with the school and the annual review of Y’s EHC Plan.
49. Overall, from July 2025 to the end of September 2025, the Council took suitable and proportionate steps to consider Y’s access to their EHC Plan provision and ensure this was delivered through Y’s school. I do not find fault with the Council.

Impact on Mr X and Y

50. Overall, the Council’s investigation found the correct one-to-one support had been in place. While Mr X disagrees with this position, the Council took the correct action to investigate and made a merits decision about delivery of Y’s EHC Plan. The Council followed the correct process and made a decision it was entitled to make. I do not find fault with the delivery of the EHC Plan provision from November 2024 to July 2025 meaning there was not injustice to Y.
51. However, the Council’s inaction from November 2024 to July 2025, given the continued contact from Mr X, would have caused Mr X uncertainty, distress and frustration. The Council should apologise to Mr X and pay him £400 for the injustice caused to him.

Funding

52. The Council agreed an uplift in funding for Y in March 2023 following discussions with Y’s school. The provision detailed in Y’s EHC Plan has remained relatively consistent since March 2023 and the school has not contacted the Council to seek extra funding for Y.
53. The Council discussed funding for Y’s EHC Plan provision with Y’s new school in July 2025, in preparation for Y to start in September 2025.
54. The Council has agreed funding with Y’s school based on Y’s needs and provision outlined in their EHC Plan. The Council has acted appropriately to consider and provide funding for Y. While Mr X may disagree with the level of funding provided, I do not find fault with the Council.

Section 19 alternative provision of education

55. A council must consider Section 19 alternative provision of education for a child who has been absent from school for non-medical reasons for more than five consecutive school days. Y missed a total of three and a half days of education in the academic year 2024/2025 and two days at the start of the 2025/2026 academic year. Y has not met the threshold for consideration of Section 19 alternative provision of education. I do not find fault with the Council.

Complaint handling

56. At stage one, the Council’s policy says it will provide a response within fifteen working days. The Council provided its stage one complaint response in sixteen working days. The Council did not meet its complaint response timescales; this was fault. While this was fault, I do not consider a delay of one working day would have caused a significant personal injustice to Mr X.
57. The Council’s policy outlines it will provide a stage two complaint response within twenty-five working days of receipt of the escalation request. The Council met this timescale; I do not find fault.

Within the handling of Mr X’s stage two complaint, the Council promised an update in ten working days at first. The Council provided this update within the promised timescale and advised it would issue a further response at the start of September 2025. The Council provided the stage two response as this update at the end of August 2025 which was quicker than it originally told Mr X. While Mr X was dissatisfied with the Council’s response timescales and wanted responses sooner, the Council acted within its policy and promised response times with Mr X. Overall, I do not find fault in how the Council handled Mr X’s stage two complaint.

Back to top

Action

58. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Council will:
• Provide an apology to Mr X and a symbolic payment of £400 for the uncertainty, distress and frustration caused to Mr X by the Council’s failure to check whether his child’s Education, Health and Care Plan provision was in place for eight months.
59. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

60. There was fault leading to injustice to Mr X, but not Y. The Council accepted my recommendations so I have completed my investigation as I consider that a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman