The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is reminding councils of their duty to monitor and ensure education provided to children educated out of school is suitable, following an investigation into a complaint against Essex County Council.

The law says if a child of compulsory school age cannot attend school for reasons of illness, exclusion or otherwise, the council must arrange to provide suitable education. But in this case, Essex County Council failed to provide suitable education to a boy with special educational needs (SEN) for two terms after he stopped attending his special school.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council also delayed transferring the boy from his Statement of Special Educational Needs (Statement) to an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC) for 10 months.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

“Councils have a duty to ensure appropriate support and education is in place for children who, for whatever reason, are unable to attend school. In this case, although the council put some measures in place, it was simply not enough.

“As a result of our investigation, Essex County Council will now be making changes to improve services for all children out of school and for those with Special Educational Needs.”

The boy, who has severe learning difficulties, stopped attending school in 2014. The council provided a care worker to educate the boy at home from the following January but his mum complained it was not good enough.

At the end of April, the council asked an independent head teacher to review the boy’s education. They found the education provided at home was not good enough but it could be if the care worker received more training and support from school. They said the boy also needed a thorough assessment of his SEN.

Nothing changed and the mother continued to complain about the standard of his education. At the end of the summer term the council decided the education was not effective and the care provider was not a viable long-term option. From September, the council put in place improvements to the education he received at home by providing a member of teaching staff from the school.

The council issued the boy’s final EHC Plan at the beginning of February 2016, naming the school as the boy’s placement. The mother remained unhappy. He returned to school part-time in September 2016.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council at fault for failing to ensure the boy had suitable education for nearly seven months, during the time it arranged for the care provider to deliver his education. The boy missed two terms of education and the full SEN support as required by his Statement.

The council also failed to carry out an early review of the boy’s Statement once it became clear his situation had changed, and did not review or begin his assessment until 17 months after the last review. The council did not issue the boy’s EHC Plan until three months after the statutory deadline. Had the council not delayed, it is likely the additional provision in the boy’s EHC Plan would have been in place by November 2015 at the latest.

The boy has been identified as needing significantly more support than was in his original Statement. Because of the council’s faults there was a 10-month delay in the boy receiving the additional provision as set out in his EHC Plan.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s role is to remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to improve local public, and adult social care, services.

To remedy the injustice caused to the boy and his mother by the council’s failure to deliver a suitable alternative education, the council has agreed to apologise and pay the mother £2,400 to be used for the boy’s educational benefit. It will also pay the mother £500 to recognise the extra strain she was placed under and to recognise her time and trouble in consistently complaining to the council.

To remedy the injustice caused to the boy by delays in the EHC Plan process, the council has agreed to pay the mother a further £900, also to be used for her son’s educational benefit.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve a council’s processes for the wider public. In this case the council will now also review its procedures to ensure it monitors the suitable alternative education put in place for those out of school.

It will also improve its procedures to ensure it acts on changes in the circumstances of children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) and holds emergency reviews where necessary. It will also take action to ensure it completes the EHC Plan transfer process within the required 18 weeks.

A young man with special educational needs has been left in short-stay accommodation for nearly two years because social workers in Lancashire could not decide where he should live permanently, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.

The man was placed in short-stay accommodation by Lancashire County Council after his family told social workers they were struggling to cope with his behaviour and the impact it was having on his younger siblings.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the placement in January 2016 was only meant to be temporary, but the man is still living in the accommodation today. It is likely the man’s behaviour has deteriorated through not living in suitable accommodation and not receiving appropriate support.

Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, Michael King, said:

“This man has been left in limbo in this accommodation, which by its very nature was only ever intended to be a short stay. He has missed out on vital support and development opportunities while his life has been on hold for some two years.

“The knock-on effect of this delay is other families have missed out on respite care too, as the facility has been unable to offer the room to others in need while the man has been stuck there.

“I’m pleased the council accepted my recommendations and now hope it acts swiftly to put in place the proper support this man needs.”

The young man was first placed in the accommodation, which provides short breaks for people with a learning or physical disabilities, in January 2016.  At the time, he was also attending college, but he was later excluded from college because of his challenging behaviour in March 2016.

Throughout the period the council has failed to come to a proper decision about the most suitable accommodation. A nurse’s assessment suggests his current placement does not meet his sensory or emotional needs.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council at fault for the delay in finding suitable permanent accommodation for the man, and allowing the situation to drift.

His Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan was never updated to reflect his change in circumstances, and the council has not provided the support set out in his plan since March 2016.

The problems with the man’s behaviour may have been prevented or reduced if he had received the support he was entitled to as set out in his EHC Plan. The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council:

• failed to amend or stop his Plan when he could no longer attend college
• failed to ensure the provision set out in his Plan was met by Day Service
• failed to hold an annual review of the Plan, and so
• denied the man’s parent the right to appeal to the Tribunal

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s role is to remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to improve local public, and adult social care, services.

In this case, the council has agreed to find suitable long-term accommodation as soon as possible for the man and provide the Ombudsman with an action plan with timescales.

The council will assess what additional support he needs in the interim to make the Short Breaks Service, where he is currently living, suitable to meet his needs and put this in place. It will also review his EHC Plan.

The council will pay the man’s parent £2,500 to use for the man’s benefit to support his educational, social, language and behavioural needs. It will apologise and pay the parent £500 to acknowledge the distress and time and trouble they were put to, for the lost opportunity to appeal to the Tribunal in 2016, and for the delay in the right to appeal in 2017.

Michael King, The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, has responded to the Competition and Markets Authority's (CMA) Care Homes market study.

He said:

“Our Annual Review of Adult Social Care Complaints has recently highlighted that many care providers have been working harder to make their complaints processes more accessible and telling people they can come us to resolve any lasting disputes.

“But there is more work to be done, and we welcome the CMA’s recommendation for statutory signposting to us, which would place the onus firmly on care providers to make this right known to their service users. This already exists in other parts of the UK and we have called for it in England for a number of years.  

“Our casework shows there is a need for better information to be made available to service users and their families, particularly around care charges, to allow them to make informed choices about care. We are pleased to see the report call for this, and an important review of  advocacy support. Better access to advocacy services, as the CMA has recognised, would also help improve the current system for people receiving care.

“We know many people simply give up after they have been through the local complaints process even if they remain unhappy. Care staff should be empowered to provide swift and proportionate responses so as not deter people from pursuing their concerns.

“Above all, we want to see a culture shift in the approach to complaints. We know the best councils and care providers empower their workforce to deal with complaints and to view them as free feedback and an opportunity to learn from their mistakes – and those of others – to drive service improvements. This can only be done by taking ownership of complaints, and their outcomes, at the highest level.”

El Síndic de Greuges ha abierto una actuación de oficio para aclarar los cambios de criterios en la distribución de las etiquetas medioambientales para vehículos menos contaminantes. En opinión del Síndico, la actuación de la Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT) se ha caracterizado por la falta de transparencia y un aparente afán recaudador.

Por este motivo, el Síndic ha trasladado el caso al Defensor del Pueblo, que tiene competencia para supervisar el organismo, dependiente del Ministerio del Interior. En su escrito, Rafael Ribó ha pedido información concreta sobre el motivo por el que actualmente aún no se han enviado todas las etiquetas medioambientales a los titulares de los vehículos que son beneficiarios de este distintivo. También ha preguntado por qué razón las etiquetas han pasado a comercializarse por medio de Correos a un precio de cinco euros cuando hasta ahora la DGT las había estado enviando de forma gratuita al domicilio de los interesados.

La problemática ha surgido delante la entrada en vigor el 1 de diciembre de 2017, de las medidas de restricción de circulación. En concreto, estas medidas prevén que en situación de episodio de contaminación ambiental los turismos que no dispongan de la etiqueta ambiental de la DGT (Cero, Eco, C y B) no podrán circular a la zona de bajas emisiones, que es una área de 95 km² que incluye todo el municipio de Barcelona (excepto Zona Franca-polígono industrial y el barrio de Vallvidrera, Tibidabo y les Planes), y también diversos ámbitos de los municipios vecinos limítrofes con las rondas.

Esta situación conlleva un agravio comparativo entre los titulares de los vehículos que sí que han recibido la etiqueta a su domicilio y de otros que se deben desplazar y pagar una etiqueta que hasta ahora se había distribuido gratuitamente, y además sin dar explicaciones sobre la cuestión.

Es necesario tener presente que el uso de este distintivo es recomendable, pero no es obligatorio. Sin embargo, dado que facilita la rápida identificación de los vehículos menos contaminantes, se recomienda que se adhiera en el ángulo inferior derecho del parabrisas delantero o en cualquier lugar visible del vehículo.