Summary: The Council was at fault for issuing Ms Z’s amended final Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan in November 2025 without carrying out an annual review and failed to communicate properly with Mrs X between May and August 2025. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X and Ms Z to acknowledge the uncertainty and frustration it caused. It also agreed to carry out service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council delayed reviewing her adult child, Ms Z’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, failed to secure the specialist provision since March 2025 and did not communicate properly with her about the issue.
2. She said this caused avoidable distress and negatively impacted on Ms Z’s education and health. She wants the Council to secure the provision immediately, provide extra support, increase its remedy offer, and make services improvements to prevent similar failings in future.

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. I have investigated what happened between June 2024 when the Council issued Z’s EHC Plan, and November 2025 when the Council issued Ms Z’s amended final EHC plan.
8. 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)
9. I have not investigated matters that happened after the Council issued Ms Z’s amended final EHC Plan in November 2025 as Mrs X has not yet complained to the Council about them. In line with paragraph eight above this puts this period November 2025 onwards outside of our jurisdiction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. 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

Relevant law and guidance

EHC Plan 

12. 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. 

Content of an EHC Plan

13. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: 

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

Section 42 – Securing specialist provision

14. 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)
15. 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. 

Appeal rights

16. 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.
17. There is a right of appeal to the Tribunal against a council’s 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.
18. The courts have established that if someone has appealed to the Tribunal, the law says we cannot investigate any matter which was part of, was connected to, or could have been part of, the appeal to the Tribunal. (R (on application of Milburn) v Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman [2023] EWCA Civ 207.

Reviewing EHC Plans

19. 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) 

What happened

Background

20. Mrs X’s complained on behalf of her adult child, Ms Z, who has special educational needs and had an EHC Plan since 2021. Ms Z attended a post 16 college (college A) from September 2023. At Ms Z’s annual review (AR) in February 2024, college A reported that while Ms Z was studying her main course, she also tried to obtain qualifications in Maths and English. However, Ms Z’s attendance rate was 59%, and the review report noted she needed to attend more regularly to improve her chances of achieving the qualifications.

Matters subject to investigation

21. In June 2024, the Council issued Ms Z’s final EHC Plan, naming college A in Section I as Ms Z’s placement. Section F of the Plan stated that Ms Z would receive support from teaching staff, alongside pastoral support and mentoring. The plan also specified that Ms Z would receive both small-group and individual support to develop functional skills in English and Maths.
22. In August 2024 Mrs X and Ms Z attended an open day at college A and decided to explore the option of an apprenticeship for Ms Z instead.
23. In September 2024 Ms Z decided not to return to college A for the new academic year. Mrs X told us this was because college A was not meeting her educational needs appropriately and she did not gain her English and Maths qualification at the end of the last academic year. The Council said Mrs X only informed it Ms Z was no longer attending college A in March 2025.
24. In April 2025, the Council contacted Mrs X for an update on Ms Z’s education or employment status. Mrs X explained that Ms Z was seeking an apprenticeship but lacked the Maths and English qualifications needed to secure a placement. The Council informed her that Ms Z’s EHC Plan would cease if she moved into higher education or employment. Mrs X asked whether the Council could provide support to help find a suitable placement.
25. Later that month, Mrs X informed the Council that Ms Z had a Maths and English assessment with an independent provider, company B. Company B had offered Ms Z a place to complete her Maths and English qualifications. Mrs X asked the Council if it could financially support Ms Z in enrolling on this course.
26. In May 2025 Ms Z’s case worker, Mr M made a referral for Ms Z to access Maths and English tutoring at company B.
27. Throughout May and June 2025 Mrs X contacted the Council on several occasions requesting a response from Mr M and an update on whether Ms Z could enrol with company B.
28. In June 2025 another case worker contacted Mrs X explaining Mr M was on sick leave and promised they would speak to their manager to see what could be done in Mr M’s absence.
29. In August 2025, Mr M was back from sick leave and resumed contact with Mrs X.
30. The same month, Mrs X complained to the Council about ongoing delays in reviewing Ms Z’s EHC Plan. Mrs X also said the Council failed to assign a new case officer during Mr M’s time on sick leave and failed to arrange Ms Z’s English and Maths support.
31. Later that month the Council contacted Mrs X to discuss arrangements for Ms Z’s AR. As it had not yet secured Ms Z’s provision, there were no tutors available to provide professional input into the review. The Council and Mrs X therefore agreed to postpone the AR until tutors were in place and able to make meaningful contributions to the EHC Plan.
32. Shortly afterwards, the Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint. It said a further AR had not taken place since February 2024 because Ms Z was not receiving tuition and Mrs X had agreed to delay the review pending further professional input. The Council apologised for delays in communication, explaining these were caused by Mr M’s sick leave and shortcomings in staff cover arrangements. It also said efforts to secure Maths and English tuition were ongoing, with both the Council and Mrs X looking for suitable providers and noted that funding approval was subject to a panel process.
33. In September Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. She also requested that the Council made a financial remedy in recognition of its prolonged delay in securing the specialist provision specified in Ms Z’s EHC Plan.
34. In early September the Council held a panel meeting which reviewed Ms Z’s proposed tutoring package. The panel decided it could not make a decision on Ms Z’s tutoring package without carrying out an AR as the last one was long overdue.
35. The Council arranged Ms Z’s AR for mid September but this meeting did not take place due to a scheduling problem.
36. Later that month, the Council sent Mrs X its final complaint response. It said it had not known until March 2025 that Ms Z had left college A, meaning the college was unable to complete her AR. The Council accepted it failed to progress a referral for English and Maths tuition because Mr M was on sick leave. It apologised for its poor communication between May and August 2025 and offered Mrs X £1,800. This included £1,500 for 1.5 terms of lost specialist provision between March and July 2025, and £300 to recognise the time and trouble Mrs X spent pursuing the matter because of its poor communication between May and August 2025. Mrs X told us she had not accepted the payment.
37. Unhappy about the Council’s offer, Mrs X complained to us in September 2025.
38. Following our enquiries we have seen evidence the Council issued Ms Z’s amended final EHC Plan in November 2025, naming college A as Ms Z’s placement from September 2025. There is no evidence the Council carried out an AR prior to issuing the amended final EHC Plan. No amendments were made to Section F, which remained unchanged from the 2024 version. The plan continued to specify that Ms Z would receive both small-group and one-to-one support to develop functional skills in English and Maths.

My findings

Delay in reviewing Y’s EHC Plan

39. The Council last reviewed Ms Z’s EHC Plan in February 2024 and was due to carry out another AR in February 2025. There is no evidence the Council carried out an AR during 2025 which was fault and caused Mrs X and Ms Z uncertainty.
40. Instead, the Council issued Ms Z’s amended final EHC Plan in November 2025 without carrying out an AR which is fault. It denied Mrs X a right to discuss any changes in Ms Z’s educational or medical needs. If as a result Mrs X disagreed with the EHC Plan issued in November 2025 and in line with paragraphs 16 to 18, she had the right to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. There is no evidence she used her right to do so.

Y’s specialist provision between March and July 2025

41. The Council named college A in Ms Z’s EHC Plan in June 2024. There is no evidence college A was unable or unwilling to provide the provision in the plan. Instead, Mrs X and Ms Z decided she would stop attending college A to pursue an apprenticeship. The Council was unaware Ms Z had stopped attending until March 2025 and there is no evidence concerns were raised prior to this in either the February 2024 AR or via an appeal to the Tribunal. The Council was not at fault between March and July 2025 because provision remained available at college A, but Ms Z chose not to attend.

Poor communication from March 2025

42. The Council acknowledged it failed to arrange cover when Mr M was on sick leave. This led to poor communication with Mrs X between May and August 2025 which was fault and caused Mrs X uncertainty and frustration.

Back to top

Actions

43. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following actions:
1. Apologise and make a payment of £300 to Mrs X and Ms Z in recognition of the uncertainty and frustration caused by the Council’s:
1. failure to review Ms Z’s EHC Plan in 2025; (£200)
2. failure to review Ms Z’s EHC Plan prior to issuing it in November 2025; and
3. poor communication with Mrs X between May and August 2025. (£100)

We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.

2. Draw up an action plan, with timescales, setting out the action the Council will take to ensure it carries out annual reviews in accordance with statutory timescales. The action plan should also ensure it has processes in place to put appropriate cover in place for both planned and unplanned extended absences of case officers to maintain continuity of case management and minimise disruption to service delivery.
2. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

45. I have found fault and the Council agreed to remedy the injustice caused by the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman