Summary: Based on current evidence Council was not at fault for the education provision in place for Y but it delayed completing an education, health and care needs assessment. That caused Miss X frustration and uncertainty. An apology and payment to Miss X is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complained the Council:
• delayed completing in education, health and care needs assessment (EHCNA); and
• failed to ensure Y received full-time education.
2. Miss X says because of the Council’s actions Y missed out on education.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. 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.
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(i), as amended)
7. 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

8. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Miss X's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
9. Miss X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Education

10. The Education Act 1996 (Section 19) says education authorities must make suitable educational provision for children of compulsory school age who are absent from school because of illness, exclusion or otherwise. The provision can be at a school or otherwise, but must be suitable for the child's age, ability and aptitude, including any special needs.

Special educational needs

11. A child or young person with special educational needs (SEN) may have an education, health and care plan (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.
12. The Special Educational Needs and Disability Code of Practice is statutory guidance (the code of practice). It 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:
• Where a 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 an EHC Plan within 16 weeks.

Government guidance - Working together to improve school attendance

13. For part-time timetables it says in very exceptional circumstances, where it is in a pupil's best interests, there may be a need for a school to provide a pupil of compulsory school age with less than full-time education through a temporary part-time timetable to meet their individual needs.
14. A part-time timetable should:
• have the agreement of both the school and the parent the pupil normally lives with;
• have a clear ambition and be part of the pupil's wider support, health care or reintegration plan;
• have regular review dates which include the pupil and their parents to ensure it is only in place for the shortest time necessary;
• have a proposed end date that takes into account the circumstances of the pupil, after which the pupil is expected to attend full-time, either at school or alternative provision. It can, however, be extended as part of the regular review process. In some limited cases, a pupil with a long-term health condition may require a part time timetable for a prolonged period.

What happened

15. Y had struggled to attend school and the school had introduced a part-time timetable in 2024. That involved one hour 15 minutes education each day but Y had also struggled to stay in school for that length of time on occasion.
16. Miss X asked the Council to complete an EHCNA needs assessment in December 2024. The Council initially refused that request. However, when Miss X provided more information in 2025 the Council agreed to carry out an EHCNA on 5 March 2025.
17. Due to a shortage of educational psychologists the Council could not allocate someone to complete the assessment until 27 November. The Council sent Miss X a copy of the educational psychologist report in February 2026. The Council agreed to issue an EHC Plan on 23 March 2026. The Council issued a final EHC Plan on 28 April 2026.

Analysis

18. The Council accepts it delayed completing the EHC needs assessment and in issuing a final EHC Plan. The Council should have issued the final EHC Plan in July 2025. However, the Council did not issue the final EHC Plan until April 2026. That is a considerable delay and is fault. That meant Miss X is left with some uncertainty about whether Y missed out on special educational needs support and whether he could have accessed additional provision during that period. Miss X also missed out on her appeal right.
19. I am satisfied the reason for the delay was due to the lack of an educational psychologist to complete the assessment. The Ombudsman will normally recommend £100 for each month of delay caused by the lack of educational psychologists. As the delay amounted to 9 months that is a financial remedy of £900, which the Council has offered to pay. That, plus an apology to Miss X, is a satisfactory remedy for this part of the complaint. I do not make a recommendation for any procedural remedies as I am satisfied the Council has a plan in place to address the shortage of educational psychologists.
20. Miss X says the Council knew Y was not attending school full-time from December 2024 and failed to act to ensure he received full-time education. The Council accepts it knew Y was not attending school full-time when Miss X applied for an EHC needs assessment in December 2024. The Council should have considered at that point whether its section 19 duty was engaged and it accepts it should have discussed that at the time. Failure to do that is fault.
21. The evidence I have seen though satisfies me the school put in place a part-time timetable because of Y’s difficulties coming into and remaining in school. I am also satisfied Miss X had agreed to that part-time timetable. While part-time timetables are intended to be temporary I am satisfied the school reviewed the part-time timetable regularly and Miss X attended those reviews. The evidence I have seen satisfies me Y was struggling to attend school even on the limited basis set in the part-time timetable. That would likely have been a relevant consideration for the Council when considering whether its section 19 duty was engaged. I also consider it unlikely, on the balance of probability, Y could have accessed the school for more education hours than he was receiving.
22. The issue is therefore whether the Council should have intervened to ensure Y received either alternative provision or ensured the school sent work home. The Council says the school sent work home but Miss X says that only happened at the beginning. I do not have sufficient information to establish whether the school sent work home throughout the entire period. However, I have seen no evidence Miss X contacted the Council to tell it Y was not receiving work sent home from the school or that he required alternative provision. As the Council knew Y had an agreed part-time timetable and as I am satisfied the school undertook reviews I do not criticise the Council for failing to intervene to discuss alternative provision. That is because there is no evidence the Council knew about any issues with the school sending work home for Y at the time.
23. I also take into account that Y has several issues accessing education which would likely, on the balance of probability, have affected his ability to access alternative provision or work at home. I therefore consider it is more likely than not Y would have had the same issues accessing alternative provision as he had accessing school even if the Council had intervened. Given all of that I could not say Y had missed out on education provision because the fault by the Council.

Back to top

Action

24. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Miss X for the frustration she experienced due to the faults identified in this decision. The Council may want to refer to the Ombudsman’s updated guidance on remedies, which sets out the standards we expect apologies to meet; and
• pay Miss X £900.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman