Summary: We found the Council at fault for delays in completing an Education, Health and Care Plan for Mrs X’s child and for failing to provide them with a suitable education. The Council’s actions caused distress for Mrs X and caused her child to miss out on education. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed completing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan for her child, Y. She said this caused Y to miss out on support they were entitled to.
2. Mrs X also complained that the Council didn’t provide a suitable education for Y when they could not attend school. She said this caused Y to regress and caused strain for the whole family.
3. Mrs X also said the Council’s communication with her about these matters was poor, which added to her frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
6. 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.
7. 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)
8. 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

Scope of complaint

9. I have investigated this complaint from September 2024, which was when Y started on a temporary reduced timetable at school.
10. I have ended my investigation in August 2025, which was when the Council sent Mrs X its final complaint response. However, I have considered any ongoing injustice stemming from the Council’s fault up until November 2025, when it issued Y’s final EHC Plan.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Relevant law and guidance

Alternative education provision

14. Councils must arrange suitable education at school or elsewhere for pupils who are out of school because of exclusion, illness or for other reasons, if they would not receive suitable education without such arrangements. The provision generally should be full-time unless it is not in the child’s interests. (Education Act 1996, section 19). We refer to this as section 19 or alternative education provision.
15. This applies to all children of compulsory school age living in the council’s area, whether or not they are on the roll of a school. (Statutory guidance ‘Alternative Provision’, January 2013, updated February 2025)
16. Where possible, the child’s health needs should be managed by the school so they can continue to be educated there with support, and without the need for the intervention of the council. The council does not need to become involved in such arrangements unless it has reason to believe that the education being provided by the school is unsuitable. (Statutory guidance: ‘Arranging education for children who cannot attend school because of health needs’, December 2023.)
17. Councils are expected to determine whether alternative provision should be provided under section 19 where pupils are likely to miss more than 15 days of school due to mental health issues. (Guidance: ‘Summary of responsibilities where a mental health issue is affecting attendance’, February 2023.)
18. Where councils arrange for schools or other bodies to carry out their functions on their behalf, the council remains responsible. Therefore, councils should retain oversight and control to ensure their duties are properly fulfilled.
19. We have issued guidance on how we expect councils to fulfil their responsibilities to provide education for children who, for whatever reason, do not attend school full-time. Supporting children out of school (October 2025)

Education, Health and Care assessments and Plans

20. 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.
21. Statutory guidance ‘Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years’ (‘the Code’) sets out the process for carrying out EHC assessments and producing EHC Plans. The guidance is based on the Children and Families Act 2014 and the SEN Regulations 2014. It says the following: 

• Where the council receives a request for an EHC needs assessment it must decide whether to agree to the assessment and send its decision to the parent of the child or the young person within six weeks. 
• If the council goes on to issue an EHC Plan, the whole process from the point when an assessment is requested until the final EHC Plan is issued must take no more than 20 weeks.

22. As part of the assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND Regulation 6(1)). This includes psychological advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP). Those consulted have a maximum of six weeks to provide the advice. 

Principles of good administrative practice

23. We publish guidance about good administrative practice for local government. We use it as a benchmark for the standards we expect when we investigate complaints about councils. Principles of Good Administrative Practice
24. This guidance says councils should keep proper and appropriate records and state reasons for decisions.

What happened

25. I have summarised the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.

The EHC needs assessment and Plan

26. Mrs X asked the Council to complete an EHC needs assessment for Y in July 2024. In August 2024 the Council said it would do an assessment. It later agreed to make an EHC Plan for Y.
27. The Council issued Y’s final EHC Plan in November 2025.

Y’s attendance at school

28. Y’s school (‘the school’) told the Council Y had started a temporary reduced timetable in September 2024. The school also shared its plan to improve Y’s attendance with the Council.
29. The Council had regular meetings with the school to discuss all cases of pupils with attendance issues. The Council told us the school did not mention Y in these meetings.
30. In November 2024 Mrs X told the Council Y wasn’t attending school as much as their reduced timetable said they should. She then told it in December 2024 that Y had missed at least 15 days of school so far and so Mrs X was exploring alternative provision.
31. The Council arranged for an Educational Psychologist (EP) to assess Y and provide some advice and training to the school in December 2024.
32. In late February 2025 Y stopped attending school completely. The school told the Council this in March 2025. Following this, the Council arranged meetings with the school to discuss Y’s case. The school and Council created a plan to get Y back into school, which they later shared with Mrs X. The plan included video calls with school staff, stay and play sessions and the school sending work home.
33. Mrs X complained to the Council in April 2025. She said she was still waiting for Y’s EHC Plan, but in the meantime the Council was not providing any education for Y. She asked the Council to start providing alternative education provision by the start of May 2025.
34. The Council replied to Mrs X’s complaint and said it was sorry it had not managed to arrange alternative provision by May 2025. It said it had arranged meetings between Mrs X and relevant professionals so they could agree to a suitable package of education for Y. It apologised for its poor communication with her.
35. In June 2025 the Council started providing specialist teacher visits for Y. Y also started attending an alternative provision provider for two days a week from October 2025.

Mrs X’s complaint

36. Mrs X complained to the Council about the delays in Y’s EHC needs assessment and about Y’s alternative provision. The Council accepted its communication with Mrs X had sometimes been poor and it delayed sending Y’s final EHC Plan. It apologised and offered Mrs X £500 to recognise her distress.
37. Mrs X did not accept the £500 and complained to us. She said the Council had failed to arrange a suitable education for Y when they could not attend school.

Analysis

The EHC needs assessment and Plan

38. The Council should have sent Y’s final EHC Plan by November 2024. It did not do this until November 2025. This was a delay of around 12 months, which was fault by the Council.
39. The Council said the delays were caused by high levels of demand on its EP service and the staff who write EHC Plans.
40. There is a reported national shortage of EPs. In response to our enquiries on a previous case, the Council shared with us its plan to reduce delays in EHC needs assessments caused by the EP shortages and by staff capacity issues. We are satisfied the Council is acting to reduce delays.
41. Despite the Council having a plan to reduce the delays, we will still find fault when a council cannot meet statutory timescales because of circumstances beyond its control.
42. The delay caused injustice to Mrs X and Y.:
1. Until April 2025, the injustice to Mrs X and Y was uncertainty and frustration. The Council had to wait for the EP report to be available in February 2025 before it could write Y’s EHC Plan, so it could not have written and sent Y’s final plan before April 2025. EHC Plans are based on the information available at the time of writing, therefore I cannot say what support Y likely missed out on between November 2024 and April 2025. I can, however, say the delay caused Mrs X and Y uncertainty and frustration.
2. After the EP sent their report, the Council delayed writing and sending Y’s final EHC Plan until November 2025. The Council had the statutory evidence it needed to write Y’s EHC Plan, but it did not have the capacity to do so. Therefore, from April 2025 until November 2025, the Council’s delay caused Y to miss out on provision because their EHC Plan could have been written earlier, if not for the Council’s capacity issues.

Alternative education provision: record keeping

43. We asked the Council for written evidence showing how it considered its section 19 duty and how it made decisions. The Council told us it oversaw Y’s alternative provision through mostly informal verbal discussions which were not consistently recorded in detail.
44. Our principles of good administrative practice guidance say keeping accurate records and giving reasons for decisions allows Councils to be open and accountable.
45. Therefore, it was fault for the Council to not keep clear written records of how it considered its section 19 duty in Y’s case, or how it communicated this to Mrs X.
46. This fault caused injustice to Mrs X and Y because we couldn’t check all the actions in Y’s case, which caused them uncertainty.
47. Where there were no written records from the time of Mrs X’s complaint, and the Council’s account differs from Mrs X’s, I instead used other available evidence to decide what was more likely to have happened in Y’s case.

Alternative education provision: was there fault by the Council?

48. The school placed Y on a temporary reduced timetable in September 2024 and told the Council. The school also sent the Council its plan for increasing Y’s attendance.
49. There was no fault by the Council for not providing alternative provision for Y at this point. It had no reason to believe the school could not meet Y’s needs. Guidance says councils do not need to get involved if schools can effectively support pupils back into full-time education.
50. However, there was no written evidence of how the Council reviewed the timetable and the school’s plan. The Council said the school did not raise Y’s case during its regular meetings with the Council. However, councils should review the attempts the school is taking to support the child, so it was fault for the Council to not proactively monitor Y’s case and to instead wait for the school to update it. It is councils who must decide whether alternative education is necessary, not the school.
51. In November and December 2024 Mrs X sent an email to the Council to let it know Y was struggling to engage with the reduced timetable and had missed at least 15 days of school so far. At this point, the Council should have reconsidered its section 19 duty but there was no evidence it did. Therefore, on balance, it is more likely the Council did not review its section 19 duty in December 2024 because of new information about Y’s attendance. This was fault.
52. When the school told the Council Y had stopped attending school in March 2025, the Council should have again considered its section 19 duty. The Council attended a meeting with the school in March 2025 to discuss Y’s case, so it is more likely, on balance, that it considered its section 19 duty at this point.
53. The Council did not arrange any alternative education provision at this point, so it appears, on balance, its decision was that school was providing enough education for Y and the Council did not need to arrange anything.
54. However, it did not tell Mrs X its decision, nor did it keep any written records of its decision or any reasons for it. This was fault.
55. The Council told us that it had regular meetings with the school and parents to review the alternative education provision. It said Y’s parents told it that Y would struggle to engage with anything full-time due to their needs. It said, based on parents’ feedback, it believed the alternative education provision package was suitable for Y’s needs.
56. It is more likely the Council failed to recognise that Y was not receiving a suitable education for their needs.
57. This is because there were emails from Mrs X asking the Council to arrange alternative education provision by May 2025. She also complained about the provision again in July 2025. She then complained to us about the provision in September 2025. If Mrs X was satisfied with the provision on offer for Y, it is unlikely she would have asked the Council to arrange more or complained to it at the time.
58. Additionally, the Council has only been able to show it arranged alternative education provision in July 2025, in the form of weekly visits from a specialist teacher. It then arranged for Y to attend an alternative education provision provider in October 2025 for two days a week. It has not shown that it arranged any alternative education provision before July 2025.
59. The Council said it thought what it did arrange, combined with school sending work home, was enough. However, as part of Mrs X’s complaint to the Council in April 2025, she said the work school had sent home was not suitable and Y now had gaps in their knowledge.
60. Although Mrs X did not think Y could engage with a full-time education, it was clear she felt Y needed more education than they were getting at the time.

Alternative education provision: injustice

61. For the period of November 2024 to March 2025, I cannot say if the Council’s fault caused Y to miss out on any provision. This is because Y’s school was trying to support Y back into education and the Council was providing it with advice and guidance.
62. Therefore, if the Council had considered its section 19 duty, I cannot say if it was more likely than not it would have decided it needed to provide Y with alternative education provision. It is possible it would have decided the school was doing enough to support Y. If the Council considered all the relevant information, this would have been a decision it would have been entitled to make and we would not find fault with this.
63. However, I can say the Council’s lack of clear decision-making and record-keeping for this period caused Mrs X and Y uncertainty and frustration.
64. For the period of March 2025 to November 2025, the Council’s fault likely caused Y to miss out on education provision. This is because there was written evidence Mrs X raised concerns at the time about Y’s provision and said it was not enough. In contrast, there was no written evidence of how the Council reviewed Y’s alternative education provision or how it made its decision that it was suitable for Y’s needs.
65. The Council did arrange for an EP to give the school advice on attendance. It also arranged some alternative education provision in July 2025, and then more in October 2025, which reduced the overall injustice to Y.

Communication

66. In its complaint response, the Council accepted it didn’t always respond to Mrs X’s messages.
67. This fault added to Mrs X’s frustration and uncertainty.

Financial remedy

68. Where we find fault by a Council causing significant personal injustice, we can recommend a remedy.
69. For the distress caused by the delayed EP report between November 2024 and April 2025, the Council will pay Mrs X £500. This is £100 per month of delay.
70. Where a council’s fault causes a child to miss out on educational provision, our guidance on remedies says we will usually recommend a remedy payment of between £900 and £2,400 per term to recognise the impact of that loss.
71. For the lack of education provision caused by the delayed draft and final EHC Plans and the Council’s failure to arrange suitable alternative education provision between March 2025 and November 2025, the Council has agreed to pay Mrs X £2,000. This is £1,000 per term. This amount considers:

• that Y’s needs meant they likely could not have engaged with a high level of alternative education provision;
• the added impact of Y’s EHC Plan also being delayed at the same time;
• Y received some provision from school; and,
• the Council did provide some alternative education provision in July 2025, and more in October 2025.

72. For the added distress caused to Mrs X and Y by the Council’s record-keeping and communication failures, the Council has agreed to pay Mrs X £200.

Service improvements

73. Where we find fault by an organisation, we can recommend changes to improve how the organisation delivers its services to prevent the same issue happening to others.
74. The Council has shared with us the impact of its action plans in reducing delays caused by EP shortages and staff capacity. In response to previous investigations, it already agreed to take actions to improve how it communicates with parents of children who are not attending school and how it considers its section 19 duties.
75. Therefore, I have not made any further service improvement recommendations, but we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the Council’s actions through our casework.

Back to top

Agreed action

76. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council will:
1. apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused to her and Y by the failings identified during this investigation. This apology should be in accordance with our guidance for making an effective apology;
2. pay Mrs X a total of £2,700 for the injustice caused to her and Y by the faults identified during this investigation.
77. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman