Overview:

Key to names used

• Mrs E The complainant

• The complainant’s son

• The complainant’s son

Summary

The complainant (Mrs E) has two sons, who both have SEN. For one son the Council failed to provide them with speech and language therapy and occupational therapy included within their EHC Plan. For the other son, the Council also failed to provide him with speech and language therapy and failed to complete reviews of his EHC Plan in time. The investigation has highlighted systemic failings in the delivery of speech and language and occupational therapy services by the provider used by the Council to deliver these services to children with EHC Plans. This despite the Council having recommissioned that service and introduced a new strategy to meet the therapeutic needs of children with SEN in its area during 2024.

Finding

Fault found causing injustice and recommendations made.

Recommendations

The Council must consider the report and confirm within three months the action it has taken or proposes to take. The Council should consider the report at its full Council, Cabinet or other appropriately delegated committee of elected members and we will require evidence of this. (Local Government Act 1974, section 31(2), as amended)

To remedy Mrs E’s injustice we recommend within three months of the date of this report the Council:

• apologise to her, accepting the findings set out in this report; and

• make a symbolic payment to her of £1,000.

We also recommend the Council undertake the following service improvements.

• Set out a plan for how it will tackle any shortfall in meeting the needs of children and young people with EHC Plans whose needs are not currently met by the therapy service. The plan should include specific measurable targets for improved performance to ensure there is no shortfall in the service to pupils with EHC Plans who need speech and language therapy and/or occupational therapy.

• Develop a protocol for cases where the therapy service cannot deliver therapy provision in line with a child’s EHC Plan. The overriding aim of this should be to ensure the child or young person receives the therapy specified in their Plan. So, the protocol should address how the Council and therapy provider can do this, which may include sub-contracting more work to third party providers or paying for therapy delivered privately which the parent has accessed. It should make clear that while the therapy provider can continue to support schools to meet the needs of children and young people in line with the Council’s therapy strategy, this cannot be at the expense of delivering specific provision detailed in an EHC Plan.

• Provide a briefing to staff who deal with complaints about special educational needs provision, setting out our expectation that when the Council identifies a service failing it will consider ways of remedying that in line with our published guidance on remedies.

The Council has agreed to all the recommendations.

Print this page