Summary: The Council is at fault for delay completing the Education, Health and Care Needs Assessment and finalising the Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council apologised and explained this was because of a delay receiving the Educational Psychologist report. The Council has offered a financial remedy for the frustration and uncertainty this caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to complete an Educational Psychologist (EP) report and Education, Health and Care (EHC) Needs Assessment for her child, C, within the statutory timescales.
2. She said C is refusing to attend school most days and becomes dysregulated when she does. Ms X said C’s needs are not being met due to the lack of an EP report and EHC Needs Assessment. This has caused the family distress. Ms X would like the Council to complete the EP assessment and decide if it will issue an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She would also like a financial remedy, interim support and systemic improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.
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 the future we may recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(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).
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 have not investigated

7. I have investigated the delay in the EHC needs assessment and finalising the EHC Plan. I have not investigated the contents of the Plan itself. If Ms X is not satisfied with this, she has a right of appeal to the Tribunal. This is not something I can investigate.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

The Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan 

10. 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. 
11. 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.

12. 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. 

Appeal rights

13. 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.
14. 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)

What happened

15. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
16. The Council agreed extra funding for C’s preschool in April 2022. This funding continued throughout C’s education.
17. Ms X asked the Council for an EHC needs assessment at the end of January 2025.
18. The Council agreed to do an EHC needs assessment in the middle of February 2025.
19. The EP completed their report in April 2026.
20. The Council completed the needs assessment and decided C needed an EHC Plan five days later.
21. The Council drafted the EHC Plan in early May 2026 and sent it to Ms X a week later. Ms X asked the Council made changes to the EHC Plan.
22. The Council finalised the EHC Plan in the middle of July 2026.

The complaint

23. Ms X complained to the Council in late June 2025. She said the Council had failed to complete the EP report and had not decided if it was going to issue an EHC Plan. She said the delay was having a harmful impact on her child as they did not have access to suitable education and support. She said she wanted an explanation for the delay and confirmation when the Council would finalise the EHC Plan.
24. The Council responded in the middle of July 2025. It apologised for the delay in deciding whether to issue an EHC Plan and said this was because of the delay in the EP assessment. The Council explained this was because of an unprecedented increase in requests for EHC needs assessments and EP assessments both nationally and locally. To remedy this, the Council said it had contracted associate and locum EPs to maximise capacity and increase the number of assessments completed.
25. The complaint response said the Council provided C’s school with extra funding for their special educational provision. It advised Ms X to work with the schools Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) team to meet C’s needs through the graduated approach.
26. Ms X was not satisfied with the response and asked for a stage two investigation, The Council issued the stage two response at the beginning of October 2025. The Council fully upheld the complaint and said the delay in the assessment continued to have a significant impact.
27. Ms X complained to us in late October 2025.

My enquiries

28. In conversation with me, Ms X said C attends school every day for the full day.
29. In response to my enquiries, the Council said C’s attendance record for the academic year 2025 to 2026 was just under 80%. The School provided specialised targeted provision to meet C’s needs.
30. The Council said it delayed issuing the final EHC Plan by just over a year. The main reason for the delay was because of the delay receiving the EP report. The Council offered Ms X a symbolic payment of £1,300 in recognition of the delay. It said it calculated this at £100 per month for the 13-month delay and had referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on Remedies.

Analysis

31. Ms X asked the Council for an EHC needs assessment in late January 2025. The statutory timescale for completing an EHC needs assessment and issuing a final EHC Plan is 20 weeks. The Council should have finalised the EHC Plan by the middle of June 2025. The Council issued the final EHC Plan in the middle of July 2026. The Council’s delay was around 13 months. This was a significant delay and was fault.
32. The longest part of the delay was between the Council’s decision to assess C in February 2025 and receipt of the EP report in the middle of April 2026. The Council could not complete the assessment without this report. Once the Council received the EP report, it completed the EHC Plan within two months.
33. In response to my enquiries, the Council offered Ms X a symbolic payment of £1,300 for the delay. The Council calculated this at £100 per month for the frustration and uncertainty caused to the family by the 13-month delay which is in line with the Ombudsman's guidance. This is a satisfactory remedy.
34. The Council issued the EP report and the final EHC Plan. There is no continuing injustice. If Ms X is not satisfied with the Plan, she has a right of appeal to the Tribunal. This is not something I can investigate.
35. The Council apologised to Ms X for the delay in its complaint response.
36. The Council explained what measures it is taking to try and reduce the backlog of assessments. I do not need to make any further recommendations for service improvements.

Back to top

Action

37. Within four weeks of the final decision, the Council should pay Ms X £1,300 for the frustration and uncertainty caused to the family by the delay issuing the EP report and the final EHC Plan, as it offered in response to my enquiries.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman