Special educational needs


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Swindon Borough Council (18 001 756)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 16-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs S complained the Council failed to provide support to their family when they were going through child protection procedures. There is evidence of fault in the way services to the family were not joined up. This caused injustice to Mr and Mrs S and the Council has agreed to change its procedures and to pay a financial remedy.

  • Hampshire County Council (18 008 295)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain that their child was out of education between March 2017 and November 2018, and about the way the Council handled their complaint. They say the delays in getting their child into education have disadvantaged their child. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council for the child being out of education. However, the Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for sending an incorrect Education, Health and Care plan, and for the way it handled their complaint. The Ombudsman finds that the fault in complaint-handling caused Mr and Mrs X injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr and Mrs X. The Ombudsman does not find that the fault in sending the incorrect plan caused Mr and Mrs X injustice.

  • Essex County Council (18 012 010)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 08-Apr-2019

    Summary: Miss C complains that the Council delayed in reviewing her son's EHC plan, which in turn delayed her appeal resulting in her son missing out on speech and language therapy provision for a term. I have completed my investigation on the basis there was fault in the way the Council dealt with the review. The Council has agreed to offer a financial remedy to Miss C.

  • London Borough of Bromley (18 010 624)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 05-Apr-2019

    Summary: The complainant says the Council failed to carry out assessments recommended in a 2014 Statement of Special Educational Needs and repeated in a 2018 Education Health and Care Plan. The complainant says the Council failed to review the Statement or EHC Plan for a student's transition to post-16 education from year 9 onwards. This resulted in missed provision and support. The Council accepts it did not conduct annual reviews of the Statement or provide the assessment or planning for the transition but did provide home tuition. The Ombudsman finds the Council acted with fault and recommends a remedy to address the injustice.

  • London Borough of Croydon (17 014 032)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 02-Apr-2019

    Summary: The Council was at fault in failing to review the EHC Plan of Mrs A's son following the withdrawal of SALT provision, and in not responding to Ms A's complaint about this. However, the Council has apologised, and taken appropriate steps to remedy matters and prevent a recurrence. Ms A's son has not suffered injustice through the lack of SALT provision.

  • North Yorkshire County Council (18 010 927)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 01-Apr-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide alternative education for her child, Y, who was unable to attend school for health reasons. The Council was at fault. It failed to ensure Y received suitable alternative education between September 2017 and April 2018. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her £1500 to use for the benefit of Y's education. It also agreed to pay Mrs X £250 to recognise the distress and uncertainty caused to her.

  • London Borough of Croydon (18 003 988)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 29-Mar-2019

    Summary: Ms B complains that the Council did not provide appropriate special educational needs provision for her son. Ms B also complains that the Council wrongly started child protection proceedings. We have not investigated some of Ms B's complaints, including her complaint about child protection proceedings. The Council was not at fault for most of the matters complained about. The Council was at fault for not amending Ms B's son's EHC Plan when it made changes to his provision. But, we cannot say on balance this caused Ms B and her son an injustice.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (18 003 499)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council and Trust failed to ensure the support set out in her son, B's, Education, Health and Care Plan during the 2017-18 school year was provided. She also complained the Council failed to involve her in planning the help B needed. The Council was at fault when it twice failed to issue the NHS Clinical Commissioning Group with a copy of B's Plan. However, B did not suffer an injustice because he received the Occupational Therapy specified in his assessment of his needs. The Council was also at fault when it included support in B's Plan which it did not consider B needed, took too long to issue B's amended final Plan and incorrectly advised Mrs X that it could not consider her complaint. However, these faults did not cause Mrs X or B a significant injustice. There was no fault in the Trust's actions.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (17 017 349)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: The Council delayed dealing with Mrs B's request in March 2016 for a personal budget to fund her daughter's special educational needs. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Mrs B to recognise her frustration and the time and trouble she was put to as a result of the Council's delay. There was no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mrs B's subsequent request for a personal budget in October 2017.

  • Norfolk County Council (18 010 219)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide the special educational provision in her son, Z's, Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council delayed slightly in finalising Z's Plan but this did not amount to fault. The Council failed to provide some of the speech and language therapy and occupational therapy specified in Z's Plan, which caused Z some injustice. The Council should ensure this support is put in place. The Council was also at fault for cancelling Z's short break funding but this did not cause Z an injustice. The Council should review its procedures to ensure it is acting in line with the relevant legislation when young people with EHC Plans transition from children's to adult's services.

;