Suffolk County Council apologises to child and family and agrees to pay compensation for missed educational provision and ‘distress’ caused

The ombudsman has said Suffolk County Council has agreed to pay a mother £4,100 for a raft of failures after her child was left with little or no education in the lead up to their exams.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), which investigates complaints about council services, found fault with the county council in the case of the child whose attendance to school declined rapidly after suffering severe trauma.

The child’s school was concerned about their wellbeing following the trauma, and that they could no longer come to school, and asked the council to source suitable alternative provision for them and to update the EHCP (education, health and care plan).

An EHCP sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them, including SEN (special educational needs) provision. The council – in this case SCC - is responsible for making sure that they are put in place.

Upholding the parent’s complaint, the ombudsman found fault with SCC for failing to secure alternative provision, for failing to comply with the EHCP regulations, and for its complaint handling.

The decision report from July said the council had agreed to make a financial payment in recognition of the missed provision and ‘distress’ caused totalling £4,100.

This is made up of £2,400 for the time the child was without any education, £1,200 for the time they were without the full provision and £500 in recognition of ‘the distress, uncertainty and delayed appeal rights’.

The child was without education from February 2023 to May 2023 and without the full agreed alternative provision from May 2023 to July 2023. The child was able to reintegrate back to school in September 2023.

The investigator, on behalf of the ombudsman, said: “Given that Child Y had very little education or provision between February 2023 and July 2023, and was at a key milestone with impending major exams, I consider the injustice to them to be significant. I am therefore recommending a remedy to reflect this.”

The report said the child tried to reintegrate to school in May 2023 with a part-time timetable, which was to be supported with one-to-one support in school and alternative provision in the form of tuition provided by the council.

However, the tuition service was not available, and the one-to-one support not consistent. The child continued to experience issues attending school and was temporarily excluded.

The report said as the mother had not received an update from the council about top-up support in the lead-up to their exams she sourced and paid for her own tuition.

Over the council’s complaint handling, the investigator also noted the council’s policy is to reply to complaints at stage two within 65 working days, however in this case it took approximately 117 working days – ‘significantly’ outside of the council’s policy.

The investigator said there was fault by the council ‘causing distress and uncertainty to Mrs X at an already difficult time’.

There was also ‘delay causing distress and uncertainty’ to the mother over her child’s EHCP review.

The report said the school sent the council the paperwork for a new review in March 2023 and at this point the council should have completed the review and issued a decision whether to amend or maintain the plan, but it failed to do this until June 2023.

The council’s response to the stage-two complaint accepted the delay in reviewing, amending and issuing decisions for Child Y’s EHCP and accepted the child’s plan needed reviewing further because of a new diagnosis.

The investigator said they would not be recommending any further service improvements for SCC as they had issued several decisions of a similar nature in recent months, and the council had already agreed to service improvements which would address the issues from this complaint.

A spokesperson for SCC said: “We recognise that some families face frustrations with the way we do things, and that isn’t good enough. We are sorry for the distress caused to the child and family.

“Changing the way we deliver SEND services remains our number one priority and we continue to dedicate extra resource to our reform.

“The delivery of SEND provision is complex, involves lots of other agencies such as health and schools, and sits within a broken national system, but we are determined to continue to deliver effective change in what we do, with our focus on better outcomes for children and young people.”