The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The Council delayed holding an annual review of Mrs X’s child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC Plan for 14 months. It meant Y went without an updated EHC Plan for 15 months. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X for the injustice this caused. It also agreed to carry out service improvements.
The complaint
Mrs X complained the Council delayed carrying out an annual review of her child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan by over two years.
She said the delay means Y has had an out of date EHC Plan and delayed her appeal rights and right to mediation which has caused distress and uncertainty.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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) Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
How I considered this complaint
I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant law and guidance EHC Plans A child or young person with special educational needs may have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. This document sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The EHC Plan is set out in sections which include: Section B: Special educational needs Section F: The special educational provision needed by the child or the young person.
Section G: Any health provision required because of their learning difficulties or disabilities which results in the child or young person having SEN Section I: The name and/or type of educational placement EOTAS (Education other than at School) EOTAS is education for children and young people with EHC Plans who cannot attend any educational setting due to their special educational needs. Instead they receive their education and specialist provision either at home or within another external setting that is not a registered educational setting.
Reviewing EHC Plans The council must arrange for the EHC Plan to be reviewed at least once a year to make sure it is up to date. The council must complete the review within 12 months of the first EHC Plan and within 12 months of any later reviews.
Where the council proposes to amend an EHC Plan, the law says it must send the child’s parent or the young person a copy of the existing (non-amended) Plan and an accompanying notice providing details of the proposed amendments, including copies of any evidence to support the proposed changes. (Section 22(2) Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and SEN Code paragraph 9.194). Case law sets out this should happen within four weeks of the date of the review meeting. Case law also found councils must issue the final amended EHC Plan within a further eight weeks.
What happened Mrs X has a child, Y who has an EHC Plan. Y has a diagnosis of autism and has social and communication difficulties. Y receives their education via an EOTAS package which has been in place since 2021.
Prior to this complaint Y’s last EHC Plan was issued in August 2023 prior to Y beginning post 16 education.
Y’s annual review was due to take place in May 2024 however the meeting was not arranged. Records show Mrs X contacted the Council on numerous occasions between August and December 2024 chasing the matter and asking the Council to arrange the review. Mrs X said it was causing uncertainty about some of Y’s provision as it need changing going forward.
Mrs X complained to the Council in January 2025 about its failure to hold the annual review.
The Council responded to Mrs X in February 2025 at stage one of its complaints procedure. It acknowledged that it should have held Y’s annual review in May 2024. It apologised for the delay. The Council said following recruitment of staff it had allocated Y an officer to move the review forward. The Council noted Mrs X had requested a change to part of Y’s EOTAS provision which it had accepted and implemented despite the delays holding the annual review.
Mrs X contacted Y’s case officer in March 2025 as the review meeting had still not been arranged. Mrs X asked whether new assessments could be completed as part of the review as the Educational Psychologist report on file was very out of date. Mrs X said Y also had new diagnoses since the previous assessments were completed. Despite chasing the matter the Council had not arranged a meeting and so Mrs X escalated her complaint at the end of May 2025.
The Council responded at stage two of the complaints process in early July 2025. It again apologised for the delays but said the annual review meeting was scheduled for early July.
Records show the annual review took place in July 2025 and the Council issued Y’s amended final EHC Plan at the end of November 2025.
Mrs X remained unhappy and complained to us.
Mrs X told us that while she had no concerns over the educational provision in the EHC Plan she remained unhappy with how the Plan outlined Y’s needs and about health provision. A mediation meeting was held in March 2026 where Mrs X again asked for new assessments. Records show the Council held another annual review in June 2026 which is ongoing at the time of writing.
My findings
Y’s annual review was due to take place in May 2024. Had the Council held the meeting in a timely manner then it should have then issued an amended EHC Plan for Y by, at the latest the end of August 2024. The Council delayed holding the annual review meeting until July 2025 which is a delay 14 months and fault.
There was more delay following the July 2025 meeting after it delayed by seven weeks in issuing the final Plan which was also fault.
Overall the delays meant Y went without an updated EHC Plan for 15 months longer than necessary. Although there is no evidence that these delays disrupted or impacted on Y’s education it caused Mrs X significant distress, uncertainty and time and trouble chasing the matter. It also delayed her right to mediation.
Most of the issues Mrs X has raised about Y’s EHC Plan are around how it reflects his needs and health related provision. I note that at the time of writing the Council is currently reviewing Y’s EHC Plan again. It is open for Mrs X to consider requesting a re-assessment of Y’s needs and/or request mediation and ultimately appeal to the SEND tribunal if Y’s needs are not properly reflected in Section B of the Plan.
Action
Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following action: Apologise to Mrs X and pay her £600 to recognise the distress, uncertainty and time and trouble caused to her by the delays in holding Y’s annual review and subsequently issuing an amended EHC Plan between 2024 and 2025. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
Produce an action plan to improve how it provides oversight and timeliness of Education, Health and Care Plan annual reviews. The action plan should consider the findings of this case and ensure that sufficient procedures and processes are in place so annual reviews are held and completed within statutory timescales. The Council should complete the actions and update us within three months of the final decision.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Decision I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed to my recommendations to remedy that injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman