Summary: Ms X complains about delay in the Education and Health Care (EHC) Plan process for her daughter, Y. Ms X says the Council also failed to provide alternative provision when Y’s school closed permanently. There was fault in the way the Council delayed completing the EHC needs assessment. The Council also failed to consider and provide alternative provision for Y. This has caused significant distress and uncertainty for Ms X and Y has missed education. The Council has agreed to apologise and make symbolic payments to remedy this injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about delay in the Education and Health Care Plan process for her daughter (Y). Ms X says the Council also failed to provide alternative provision when Y’s school closed permanently.
2. Ms X says this has caused significant distress and Y has missed 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 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. 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)
5. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability-SEND) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the SEND Tribunal in this decision statement
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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

8. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6).
9. Ms X said Y has been out of education since December 2025 and the Council has failed to provide any alternative provision. I have considered this part of Ms X’s complaint until the Council issued a final EHC Plan in April 2026. Any ongoing issues after this time are a new complaint and Ms X would need to complain to the Council in the first instance.
10. Ms X has received a final EHC Plan for Y and said it does not accurately reflect Y’s needs. Ms X has a right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal if she disagrees with the contents of the Plan.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation and guidance

EHC assessments and plans

13. 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).

14. 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. 

Alternative provision

15. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says that councils 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.
16. 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.

What happened

17. Below is a summary of key events. It is not meant to detail everything that happened.
18. Ms X asked the Council to carry out an EHC needs assessment for her child, Y, in February 2025. The Council agreed to assess Y in early April. Y was five years old at the time and attended an independent school.
19. Mrs X contacted the Council in November and said Y’s school would be permanently closed in December. Mrs X requested confirmation of interim arrangements the Council would make under a section 19 duty, should the EHC Plan not be finalised by then.
20. The Council advised Mrs X to make a school application with the school admissions team for an in-year place whilst the EHC needs assessment was ongoing.
21. Mrs X did not apply for a school place and requested Education Other Than at School (EOTAS) for Y. This was declined by the Council on the basis that Y had successfully attended a school setting.
22. The Council received the Educational Psychologist’s (EP) report on 19 December 2025.
23. The Council received advice from its social care hub in January 2026, and the case was presented to its decision panel a month later.
24. The Council issued a draft EHC Plan in mid-March and a final Plan in April 2026.

The complaint

25. Ms X complained about delays in the EHC needs assessment to the Council in August 2025.
26. The Council responded to the complaint and issued a stage one and stage two response in September 2025. The Council upheld Ms X’s complaint and said that despite best endeavours, it had been unable to complete all Education, Health and Care needs assessments within the 20-week timescale. It explained the delay had been caused by a shortage of EPs.
27. The Council said it had recently appointed new EPs and Y’s case would be allocated in November 2025. It also confirmed that if an EHC Plan was agreed following completion of the assessment, then funding would be backdated to 13th July 2025, when the final Plan should have been issued.
28. Ms X remained unsatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. Later, Ms X told us Y had been out of school since it closed in December 2025.

Analysis

29. When a council agrees to complete an EHC needs assessment, it should finalise the EHC Plan within 20 weeks of the request. Ms X asked for an assessment in February 2025, and the Council should have issued a final Plan by 13 July 2025. The Council finalised the Plan in April 2026. This was a delay of nine months.
30. The significant delay in providing the EP report contributed towards the Council’s delay in completing the EHC needs assessment and the final EHC Plan. The delay in obtaining EP advice is five months. There was further delay of four months in issuing the final EHC Plan. In its complaint response, the Council accepted it had delayed completing the EHC needs assessment.
31. The Council’s failures had a significant impact on Ms X and Y. The delay caused Ms X distress and frustration and delayed her appeal rights.
32. I also consider there to be fault in the way the Council considered whether it had a section 19 duty to arrange alternative education. This period coincides with the delay in issuing the final EHC Plan, after the Council received the EP report.
33. The Council was aware that Y would be without an education from January 2026. I understand the Council advised Ms X to apply for a school place and that Ms X made an application for EOTAS. However, the Council should have recognised that an EOTAS package could not be considered at the time, as the EHC needs assessment was still ongoing, and it should have advised Ms X accordingly. Furthermore, there is no evidence the Council considered its section 19 duty around whether to put some alternative provision in place for Y while it completed the EHC needs assessment. This is fault. This meant Y was left without a suitable education for a full term.
34. The Ombudsman’s guidance for remedying injustice caused by EP related delays suggests a financial remedy of £100 per month of delay. In Ms X’s case, that equates to £500.
35. Using the Ombudsman’s remedy tariff for significant delay affecting a child’s education we consider £900 is an appropriate remedy for both the loss of educational provision and delay in issuing a final EHC Plan, after receiving the EP report. In reaching this figure I have considered Y’s age at the time and the heightened distress and uncertainty Ms X experienced as a result.
36. The Council has recently appointed additional EPs to address the workload issues it is facing. I do not consider I need to make any further recommendations for service improvements regarding this.

Action

37. Within one month of this final decision the Council will:
1. Apologise to Ms X for the faults identified in this statement and the injustice this caused.
2. Pay Ms X £500 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge their distress and frustration caused by the EP delay in the EHC Plan process. This is calculated at £100 per month of delay.
3. Pay Ms X £900 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge the loss of education and delay in issuing the final EHC Plan after receiving the educational psychologist report.
4. Identify any areas of service improvement around its duties to children unable to attend school.
5. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice to Ms X and Y. I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman