Summary: We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint about changes to her daughter’s education, health and care (EHC) plan following the annual review meeting in December 2024 because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable. The Council has apologised for the delay amending the plan and offered a symbolic remedy. There is nothing we could add to the Council’s response with further investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms M complains about changes to her daughter’s education, health and care (EHC) plan following the annual review meeting in December 2024.
2. In particular, Ms M complains:
• the Council took too long to amend the Plan following the review; and
• the Council removed 25 hours of 1:1 support included in the plan since Ms M’s appeal to the SEND Tribunal in 2022.
3. Ms M was concerned about the implications for her daughter’s transition to secondary education in September 2026, and in particular the school she would attend.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation,
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council issued a final amended plan for Ms M’s daughter in October 2025.
8. The Plan was eight months late.
9. The Council offered Ms M a symbolic payment of £800 to acknowledge the delay.
10. The Council has acknowledged it was responsible for significant delay. The Council has apologised and offered a symbolic financial remedy. The remedy is in line with our published guidance. There is nothing we could add to the Council’s response with further investigation. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
11. The Council has removed wording from the plan which said Ms M’s daughter would receive 25 hours of 1:1 support (per week).
12. This has been replaced with wording which says Ms M’s daughter will receive 15 hours of 1:1 support in three subject areas. The plan also specifies a significant amount of further support.
13. The Council says this does not amount to a reduction in support.
14. We are not qualified to judge. The plan appears to be detailed and specific, and based on current advice. Ms M has a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal if she disagrees with the plan. It would be reasonable for her to use the right of appeal if she wishes to challenge the Plan. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.
15. The plan says Ms M’s daughter will transfer to an independent special school for her secondary education. I understand this is the outcome Ms M wanted. However, if it is not, she could appeal to the SEND Tribunal.
16. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable through further investigation by us.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable. The Council has apologised for the delay amending Ms M’s daughter’s education, health and care (EHC) plan and offered a symbolic remedy. There is nothing we could add to the Council’s response with further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman