Archived decisions

Contact: Eric Smith : Education Officer SEN (01962 846245)

1 Summary

1.1 The Local Government Ombudsman has published a report on his investigation of a complaint against the County Council concerning provision to meet special educational needs (SEN). The report records that settlement of the complaint has been agreed.

1.2 The law requires that Ombudsman reports are considered by the County Council. This report has been considered by the Standards Committee on 27 January and by the Cabinet on 12 February 2004.

1.3 The Committee is recommended to note that the report has been received, that actions have been taken by the Education Department to both settle the complaint and review and revise practices and procedures, and to note the responses of the Standards Committee and Cabinet. There is no recommendation from the Ombudsman in this case because settlement has been agreed with him.

1.4 The Ombudsman's report is on public deposit at the County Council's Information Centres and is available in the Members' Room.

2 The Complaint

2.1. The complaint concerned failure to arrange provision of speech and language therapy (SaLT) in accordance with requirements specified in a pupil's statement of special educational needs. The pupil had recently moved to Hampshire with a statement issued by the previous local education authority. The number of visits by a speech and language therapist (to support the day-to-day provision of a language programme by the school) was specified in the pupil's SEN statement. The local NHS Primary Care Trust (PCT) is responsible for providing that service but, in this case, the PCT had had difficulty in recruiting speech and language therapists and failed to provide the support specified in the statement.

2.2. The SEN officer was not informed by the PCT, the school or the parent and was unaware that SaLT support was not being maintained until the annual review of the pupil's needs and SEN provision. The significance of the report is in confirming the responsibility of the County Council for ensuring that requirements specified in a SEN statement are met even when provision is arranged by another body.

2.3. The County Education Officer has, on behalf of the County Council, accepted responsibility for failing to ensure provision in accordance with the requirement specified in the statement. The annual review established that the child had continued to make progress as school staff were able to continue to deliver the language programme initially set up by the therapist. The pupil did not suffer any significant disadvantage from failure to provide support from a speech and language therapist.

3 The Ombudsman's Report

3.1 The Ombudsman decided to publish a report of his investigation because it raises matters he considered of public interest. He does not normally complete investigation and publish a report when a settlement has been agreed; he would normally exercise his discretion within the law to discontinue investigation without issue of a report, and inform complainant and local authority by private letter. The `public interest' in this case is that the Ombudsman's findings confirm what is set out in the Government's Code of Practice for Special Educational Needs - that although "Prime responsibility for provision of speech and language therapy rests with the NHS... where the NHS does not provide speech and language therapy for a child whose statement specifies such therapy as educational provision, ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the provision is made rests with the LEA...".

3.2 The preceding paragraph sets out respective responsibilities of NHS and Local Education Authorities in relation to provision of support from speech and language therapists specified in statements of special educational needs. The Ombudsman's report records the failure of the PCT's SaLT service in this case to provide the support specified in the statement. These are failings by the PCT and the PCT's SaLT Service, not the County Council. The Ombudsman's conclusions note that he would have expected the PCT to advise the County Council of difficulties and shortfall in provision it was making, giving the County Council the opportunity to consider making other arrangements. In these circumstances, it might have been appropriate for investigation of this complaint to have been joint between the Local Government Ombudsman and the Health Service Ombudsman.

4 Settlement of the complaint

4.1 The Ombudsman's report records that he has accepted and agreed a proposed settlement of the complaint. Additional funding has been made available to the pupil's current school for the purchase of ICT equipment or software to the value of £500 to enhance development of the pupil's language and communication skills. A payment of £150 has been made to the complainant in recognition of time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.

4.2. Procedures and practice in the SEN team have been reviewed in the light of the complaint to reduce likelihood of a repetition of events. A risk assessment has to be made, balancing the likelihood of failure in delivery of services against the resources needed to monitor performance of other agencies. The SEN Service has instigated changes to communication with schools and PCTs' SaLT Services giving increased emphasis to provisions in statements of SEN.

5 Actions of the County Council

5.1 Following its consideration of the Ombudsman's findings the Standards Committee of the County Council resolved:

1) that the Committee notes, on behalf of the County Council, publication of the report by the Local Government Ombudsman on his investigation of a complaint concerning provision of services specified in a pupil's statement of special educational needs and the conclusions which it sets out

2) that the Committee notes the action taken to reduce the likelihood of a repetition of the events and to endorse the action to settle the complaint (as outlined in 4.1 above)

3) that all County Council services note and take into account the implication from the Ombudsman's decision that the Council remains accountable for delivery of service when it has contracted or agreed with another body or person for provision of that service

4) that the Local Government Ombudsman be advised that, in the circumstances of this complaint, it would have been appropriate for it to have been investigated jointly with the Health Service Ombudsman

5) that the County Education Officer be requested to notify schools that, in respect of their statemented children where speech and language therapy or other contracted services are provided, the Local Education Authority should be informed as soon as possible if any children fail to receive such services

6) that a copy of the Ombudman's report and the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer to be sent to the two Primary Care Trusts involved in this matter and they be asked for their comments.

5.2 Cabinet additionally resolved:

1) that the following decisions were taken:

i. that the Cabinet notes the publication by the Local Government Ombudsman of a report on his investigation of a complaint against the County Council, and the conclusions set out in the Ombudsman's report and endorses the decisions of the Standards Committee, in particular the Committee's view that the complaint should have been investigated jointly with the Health Service Ombudsman;

ii. that a copy of the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer to be sent to the Strategic Health Authority and National Health Service Executive.

Recommendation

To note publication of the Ombudsman's report, and to note the actions taken by the Education Department to settle the complaint and to institute changes to practices and procedures in order to reduce the likelihood of the County Council being subject to a complaint arising from similar circumstances in the future; and

to note resolutions of the County Council's Standards Committee and Cabinet.