Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed in completing an Education Health and Care needs assessment and in issuing a final Education Health and Care Plan for her son. Ms X also complains of poor communication throughout the process. We found the failure to complete the needs assessment within the statutory timeframe was fault, as was the poor communication. These faults caused Ms X stress, frustration and uncertainty and affected her wellbeing. The Council will apologise and make a payment to Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council delayed in completing an Education Health and Care needs (EHC) assessment and in issuing a final EHC Plan for her son. She complains this meant her son missed out on educational provision in a stable setting. It has also caused Ms X stress and anxiety and worry for her son’s future.
2. Ms X also complains the Council failed to communicate with her during the process or to fully address her complaint. This put her to additional unnecessary time and trouble.

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)
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan.

8. 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 council can do this.
9. 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 carry out an assessment, it must decide whether to issue an EHC Plan or refuse to issue a Plan within 16 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 (unless certain specific circumstances apply);
• Councils must give the child's parent or the young person 15 days to comment on a draft EHC Plan and express a preference for an educational placement.
• The council must consult with the parent or young person's preferred educational placement who should respond within 15 calendar days.
10. As part of the assessment, councils must gather advice from relevant professionals (SEND Regulation 6(1)). This includes:
• the child's educational placement;
• medical advice and information from health care professionals involved with the child;
• psychological advice and information from an Educational Psychologist (EP);
• social care advice and information;
• advice and information from any person requested by the parent or young person, where the council considers it reasonable; and
• any other advice and information the council considers appropriate for a satisfactory assessment.
11. Those consulted have a maximum of six weeks to provide the advice.
12. The council may decide to seek additional advice, for example from an Occupational Therapist (OT) or Speech and Language Therapist (SALT), or the child's parent or young person may request this. The council should decide if this is necessary based on the individual circumstances of the case.

What happened here

13. The following is a summary of the key events relevant to our consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.
14. Mx X’s son, Y attended a mainstream primary school. On 10 July 2024 the school requested an EHC needs assessment for Y. A council officer spoke with Ms X on 15 July 2024 and then confirmed the Council would decide whether to start an assessment within six weeks of the request.
15. The Council missed this six week deadline, and wrote to Ms X on 2 September 2024, informing her it had agreed to carry out an assessment. It said the assessment would result in a draft EHC Plan which would be submitted to a panel of officers to decide whether to issue a plan within 16 weeks.
16. Y had an assessment with an Educational Psychologist (EP) in late September 2024 and the EP completed their report on 11 October 2024. The Council sent Ms X a copy of the report but there is then no record of any further progress on the needs assessment or contact with Ms X.
17. Ms X contacted the Council on 21 May 2025 to request an update on the outcome of the assessment and whether a draft Plan would be issued. The Council responded on 12 June 2025 and apologised for the delay. It said it would reallocate Y’s case to another officer. The new officer contacted Ms X on 19 June 2025.
18. Ms X asked for copies of all documents and reports used in the assessment and raised concerns that the EP report was not specific or quantifiable enough. Ms X also noted the EP report said an audit of Y's sensory profile was needed and asked how this would be addressed.
19. Ms X told the Council that since the assessment process started Y had changed educational settings. She asked whether the new setting had been asked to contribute to the assessment.
20. In late August 2025 the Council told Ms X it would not commission a sensory audit but would ask the school to make a referral to occupational therapy (OT). The Council also confirmed it considered the EP report provided enough information to structure appropriate provisions. It said it was awaiting an update from Y’s current educational setting and would then issue a draft Plan.
21. Ms X made a formal complaint on 27 August 2025 about the Council’s failure to issue a final EHC Plan within the statutory timeframe. She noted that although the Plan should have been finalised within 20 weeks, it was now 51 weeks and she had still not received a draft Plan. Although her son now had a place at an alternative provision setting, Ms X said he had missed out on legally enforceable provision in a stable setting. And would face further disruption when he had to change setting again.
22. The Council responded on 10 September 2025. It set out the action taken as part of the assessment and said the Panel reviewed the documents on 5 November 2024 and agreed to issue an EHC Plan. The Council apologised it had not communicated this with Ms X. It said it was working to improve its communication and timeliness across the service, and that this was not the standard it would expect.
23. In addition the Council apologised for the significant delays throughout the process. It said that as part of Plymouth’s SEND improvement Plan it was working to review processes, systems and capacity to ensure children and their families were not disadvantaged. The Council said it had a plan in place to address assessments which were out of time and had devised a training and development programme for all staff.
24. The Council said Y’s draft Plan would be issued no later than 12 September 2025. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan on 10 September 2024. Ms X made representations on the content and asked the Council to consult with specialist schools.
25. As Ms X was not satisfied with the Council’s response she asked for her complaint to be considered further. The Council responded with further details of the actions it had taken to improve its service.
26. Ms X remains dissatisfied and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate her concerns. Since Ms X complained to us the Council has issued a final EHC Plan. The Plan, issued on 5 November 2025, names Y’s current setting. Ms X was unhappy with the Plan but did not appeal to the SEND Tribunal.
27. The Council issued an amended final EHC Plan on 15 December 2025.

Analysis

28. The Council’s failure to complete the EHC needs assessment and issue a final Plan in accordance with the statutory timeframes is fault. Y’s school requested an assessment in July 2024 and the whole process should have taken no more than 20 week. In this instance the Council took 67 weeks to complete the assessment and issue a final EHC Plan. That is more than three times longer than it should have and is clearly unacceptable.
29. The Ombudsman takes the view that councils must abide by the statutory and legislative requirements under the SEN legislation and guidance. The Council’s failure to meet the required timeframes here is fault.
30. The substantial delay in completing the needs assessment and in issuing a final EHC Plan caused Ms X stress, frustration and uncertainty and affected her wellbeing. It also put her to unnecessary time and trouble and delayed her right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal.
31. The poor communication is also fault. The Council says it decided to carry out a needs assessment in early November 2024 but it did not tell Ms X of its decision. There is no record of any communication at all between the Council and Ms X between October 2024 and May 2025. And the communication in May 2025 was prompted by Ms X’s request for an update rather than any activity by the Council. It was only at this stage the Council told Ms X it had agreed to issue an EHC Plan.
32. These failings in communication have unnecessarily added to Ms X’s stress and uncertainty.
33. I consider the Council should make a symbolic payment to recognise the stress frustration and distress Ms X and Y have experienced as a result of the delays and poor communication.
34. The Council has set out the actions it is taking to review and improve its timeliness and communication. I do not therefore intend to make service improvement recommendations.

Back to top

Action

35. The Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X for the stress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the fault identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a symbolic payment to Ms X of £600 to recognise the stress, uncertainty and impact on her own and Y’s wellbeing caused by the fault identified.
36. The Council should take this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman