Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan. We have ended our investigation because Ms X has appealed the Education, Health and Care Plan to the Tribunal, and further investigation would not achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her child, Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan over the past 10 years. Specifically, she says the Council:

1. Failed to maintain an accurate and up-to date EHC Plan, leaving outdated information in the Plan following the annual review; and
2. Provided poor and delayed communication.

2. She says this resulted in Y having an inaccurate Plan which led to post-16 providers initially rejecting them which caused significant distress and uncertainty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. 

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. 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 haven’t 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. Ms X’s complaint concerns issues spanning the past 10 years. She was aware of these matters more than 12 months before bringing her complaint to us, so they are considered late. There are no good reasons to investigate these earlier matters now. However, I have considered the issues that arose within the 12 months prior to her complaint, specifically from September 2024 onwards.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

EHC Plans

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 EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

• Section B: Special educational needs.  
• Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person. 
• Section I: The name and/or type of educational placement.

Post-16 – review, provision and naming placement deadline  

13. For young people moving from secondary school to a post-16 institution or apprenticeship, the council must review and amend the EHC Plan – including specifying the post-16 provision and naming the institution – by 31 March in the calendar year of the transfer.  

Appeal rights

14. So far as is relevant to this complaint, there is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s:

• decision not to carry out an EHC needs assessment or reassessment;
• description of a child or young person’s SEN, the special educational provision specified, the school or placement or that no school or other placement is specified in their EHC Plan;
• amendment to these elements of an EHC Plan; or
• decision not to amend an EHC Plan following a review or reassessment.

What happened

15. Y is a young person with special educational needs and has had an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for a number of years.
16. In December 2024, the school carried out Y’s annual review.
17. In March 2025, the Council issued an amended EHC Plan. The Plan named a post-16 placement (College A) for Y from September 2025.
18. In April, Ms X complained to the Council. She said the amended EHC Plan did not accurately reflect Y’s current needs and contained outdated information. She said this led to College A initially rejecting Y. Ms X said the college later offered a place following discussions with her and Y’s school, rather than relying on the content of the Plan. She also complained about poor communication from the Council.
19. Three days later, the Council issued a further revised EHC Plan.
20. In May, the Council responded to her complaint. It said it had amended the Plan following comments from Ms X and input from Y’s school. It confirmed the revised Plan had been shared with College A, which then confirmed Y’s placement. The Council apologised for any distress caused and said it was working to improve the quality and consistency of EHC Plans through training and policy.
21. Ms X remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint. She said the Plan still contained inaccurate and outdated information and raised concerns about delays in communication. She also said Y had applied to a second provider (College B), which had placed the application on hold pending consultation with the Council.
22. In July, the Council issued a draft amended Plan.
23. Later that month, the Council issued its final complaint response. It said it could only amend the Plan based on information provided by schools and professionals. It acknowledged failures and delays in responding to Ms X’s communications and apologised. It said it had introduced improvements, including a communications policy which had improved response timeliness. It said it had made further amendments and would finalise the Plan once she had shared any comments, it would then share the Plan with College B, where Y had been offered a place.
24. In August, the Council issued a final amended EHC Plan. Ms X then appealed Sections B and F of the Plan to the Tribunal.

My findings

25. Ms X’s main concern is that Y’s EHC Plan does not accurately describe their special educational needs or the provision required. These matters relate to the content of Sections B and F of the Plan. Ms X has exercised her right of appeal to the Tribunal on these issues. The law prevents me from investigating matters that have been, or could be, considered by the Tribunal. I have therefore not investigated this part of the complaint.
26. I have considered Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s communication. The Council has acknowledged its failures and delays in responding to her and has apologised. It has also explained the steps it has taken to improve its communication, including introducing new processes and guidance. Given this, I am satisfied further investigation would be unlikely to achieve a different outcome or add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Decision

27. I have ended my investigation. I cannot investigate the matters relating to the content of the EHC Plan because Ms X has appealed to the Tribunal. I have also decided not to investigate the remaining issues, as further investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome or achieve a worthwhile result.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman