The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the SEN provision made by the Council for Ms X’s child. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.
The complaint
Ms X said the SEN provision in her child’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan has not been made.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X’s complaint to the Council was detailed, giving specific examples of allegedly missed SEN provision in the school year 2024-25. The Council’s response was similarly detailed, responding to the points made. It contained direct quotations from the EHC Plan, the questions it has asked the child’s school, and the school’s responses. It provided specific evidence in measurable forms. It took the view the SEN provision had been made. I accept that Ms X is firmly of the view that some provision was missed. However, were we to investigate this matter, it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation, or that we would find enough evidence of fault to warrant our further involvement.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation, and investigating these matters would be unlikely to add to the Council’s own investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman