Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council refusing to hold an early review of an Education Health and Care Plan or to provide alternative provision. It is unlikely we will find fault. It is reasonable to expect her to have appealed to the Tribunal the suitability and adequacy of the education provision in the Education Health and Care Plan.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council failed to assess her child, Y’s educational needs properly, refused an early review of those needs and failed to provide alternative education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
3. 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:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
• We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Miss X which included the Council’s response to her.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council issued a final Education Health and Care Plan (EHC Plan) for Y in September 2025. It named School Z where Y had been attending. Three weeks later, Miss X complained to the Council. She said the Council had refused an early EHC Plan review, that Y needed alternative provision and she set out reasons the EHC Plan assessment process had not been satisfactory.
7. The Council replied within three weeks. It refused an early review as it said the EHC Plan had not been given enough time to settle down and tried. It said Miss X should have appealed if she did not agree with the assessment process or the EHC Plan. It said alternative provision was not justified as the school was available and Y was able to attend.
8. Miss X was unhappy and requested a review of that complaint response. The Council replied at the final stage of its procedure in December. It repeated its earlier reply.

Analysis

9. 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. We usually expect parents to appeal to the Tribunal when they disagree with the EHC Plan or they believe the assessment process was so flawed it led to an inadequate EHC Plan. I see no reasons why this should not apply to Miss X’s case.
10. The Council only has to hold a review once every 12 months. The Council can refuse a request for a reassessment if less than six months have passed since a previous EHC Plan needs assessment. It can also refuse a request if it does not think it is necessary, for example because it does not feel a child or young person’s needs have changed significantly. The Council decided this applied in this case. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to hold an early review until February 2026.
11. Miss X has repeatedly requested the Council provide s19 alternative provision. Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 says the Council must arrange suitable alternative educational provision when it finds 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.
12. Councils must have regard to statutory guidance – “Arranging education for children who cannot attend school because of health needs” (December 2023). This makes it clear that councils are not expected to become involved in situations where a child can still attend school with some support. 
13. Where the parent says the council should provide education other than at school, the test will be whether the child is too unwell to attend any school, not just the school where they are on roll. 
14. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision up to February 2026 that it should not provide alternative provision. Y was attending School Z. Miss X has provided no evidence that Y could not attend any school.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision not to hold an early review or to arrange alternative provision. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to have appealed the EHC Plan issued in September 2025 if she believed it would not meet Y’s needs.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman