Summary: Miss B complained that the Council delayed in completing an Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment for her child, C and in providing C with suitable education when she was unable to attend school. We have found fault in the Council’s actions and consider the symbolic payment it has already offered to be a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Miss B complained that Essex County Council (the Council), in respect of her daughter, C:
• delayed excessively in completing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Needs Assessment and issuing an EHC Plan;
• unfairly prioritised other cases before hers; and
• failed to provide suitable and accessible alternative education since C stopped attending school in September 2024.
2. These failings have caused C to miss out on essential education and Miss B frustration and uncertainty for a prolonged period.

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. 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

5. I have investigated the period from September 2024 when C stopped attending school to October 2025 when we decided to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Miss B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
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 found

Special educational needs

9. 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. 

EHC assessment 

10. 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. 
• The process of assessing needs and developing EHC Plans “must be carried out in a timely manner”. Steps must be completed as soon as practicable. 
• 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 (unless certain specific circumstances apply);  

Advice and Information for EHC needs assessments

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

Section 19 duty

13. 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.

Establishing a section 19 duty

14. If a council discovers a child is absent from school for an extended period, it should consider the reasons for this, and take account of evidence from relevant parties (such as the child’s school, parents, and medical professionals). It must then decide whether it has a duty to make alternative educational provision.
15. Councils should consider any attempts the school is making to support the child. This might involve sending work home for the child to complete, arranging disability related support, placing the child on a reduced timetable, or providing online education as a short-term measure. If there is a clear, effective, and time-bound plan for reintegration then there may be no immediate role for the council in providing alternative education.

What happened

16. On 12 July 2024 C’s school requested an EHC needs assessment for extra support for C at school. The Council agreed to this on 20 August and sent out advice requests. C stopped attending school in September 2024.
17. On 6 November the Miss B chased the Council for an update on progress with the assessment. On 11 November the Council apologised for the delay but said this was due to a shortage of EPs and a high number of requests for assessments. It could not give a timeframe for expected completion.
18. Also in November 2024 the school held a meeting with Miss B and the Council regarding C’s educational provision. C had not been leaving the house and her attendance at school was 6%. She was showing signs of depression, was displaying some violent behaviour at home, she was not sleeping or washing and there were concerns around her eating patterns. The school explained that it had tried a number of strategies since May 2024 but they had not worked. The school also made a medical referral to the medical access team for online school, but C would not engage. A medical review meeting was held every six weeks.
19. The Council agreed to put in therapeutic support and engaged another organisation to find the right alternative provision for her.
20. In January 2025 an organisation (AP1) started working with C in the family home to provide therapeutic support. This was for six hours a week (two hours a day three times a week).
21. On 30 June the Council sent an email to Miss B apologising for the continued delay with the EHC needs assessment.
22. On 29 August, Miss B complained that after 54 weeks the assessment had still not been completed and the EP had not yet been allocated.
23. On 9 September the Council responded. It said it would prioritise C’s case for allocation to an EP and C would continue to receive support through the ordinarily available channels along with additional SEN support.
24. On 19 September Miss B complained to us and on 16 October we decided to investigate the complaint. This is the end point of my investigation. But I have added the following later events for context.
25. By 23 October the Council had received all the advice, including the EP report. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan on 24 November and began consulting for both her current education and for secondary transition the following September. Miss B requested a personal budget for alternative provision. The Council refused this request and issued a final plan on 30 January 2026 naming C’s current primary school with support from AP1 continuing. In mid-February the Council issued the final transition EHC Plan with unspecified mainstream secondary provision.
26. Following difficulties finding a suitable placement the Council agreed an Education other than in School (EOTIS) package to start in September 2026.

Response to my enquiries (June 2026)

27. In response to my enquiries the Council recognised the excessive delay in completing the EHC assessment process and issuing a final EHC Plan. It said it took 61 weeks longer than it should have done and most of this was due to delay in the EP process. It recognised this caused injustice to C in a key transition period.
28. It has apologised for this delay and offered a symbolic payment of £1525 for the delay plus an additional £500 for the poor communication and distress.
29. In respect of the EP shortage, the Council said it had invested in a recruitment drive and has employed more Assistant EPs to complement the work of the EP team. It also employs more associate/locum EPs than previously and invested in an external contract. It has also funded fixed-term roles within the SEND Operations Team to coordinate assessments.
30. In response to the complaint that EP assessments have been done ‘out of order’, the Council has highlighted a section of its SEND Improvement Plan (4 June 2024):
• “To reduce overall wait times, we will be using the limited EP resource available in the most effective way possible. This means that assessments may be undertaken out of strict chronological order at times. For example, an EP could observe more than one child in a single school visit if necessary.”
31. It also said the list of those ‘waiting’ for EP allocation is reviewed weekly against the available resource from within the existing EP team, the associate workforce and to those where a remote EP assessment could be delivered.

Findings

EHC needs assessment

32. The Council has accepted it delayed for 61 weeks in completing the EHC needs assessment and says that most of the delay was due to shortages in, and demand on, the EP team. The EP report was received by 23 October 2025 and the draft EHC Plan issued a month later, so I agree the delay was entirely due to the EP delay. This was fault which caused C to miss out on potentially over a year of special educational support, and the chance to be educated in a different environment. It also denied Miss B the opportunity to appeal against any named placement or the type of any placement along with uncertainty and frustration.
33. I consider the symbolic payment already offered by the Council is appropriate and in line with our Guidance on Remedies (£100 for every four weeks of delay due to EP shortages). I also consider the additional £500 is appropriate for Miss B’s frustration and uncertainty over a prolonged period.
34. I do not consider the Council unfairly prioritised cases above Miss B’s as it was trying to match the availability of its EP resource to the waiting cases in the most efficient manner, which was allowed for within the Improvement Plan.

Alternative provision

35. The Council was aware in November 2024 that C was not attending school at all and discussed the strategies the school had taken to try and encourage re-engagement. A medical referral was made for online tuition, but C was not able to engage in this. From January 2025 AP1 provision was arranged and by March 2025 was being delivered. Although this was on a very gradual basis, it appears to be all that C could cope with at that time. She was not leaving her bedroom and was not able to talk to anyone for at least six months. I do not find fault with Council’s consideration of its section 19 duty during this period. The provision has continued since then but nothing else has been put in place. I am not able to conclude that C would have been able to access more provision but the delay with the EHC needs assessment meant that any discussions over a more suitable placement with appropriate support or EOTIS package were delayed for over a year and has caused uncertainty.
36. I consider the symbolic payment already offered by the Council is an appropriate remedy as I cannot be certain that C has missed out on additional education given her medical condition.

Back to top

Action

37. I recommended within one month of the date of my final decision that the Council:
• apologises to Miss B and C and makes a symbolic payment of £2025.
38. As the Council has an Improvement Plan in place with provision for increasing EP capacity and this is in progress, I have not made any service recommendations.
39. The Council has agreed to my recommendation and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman