A mum has been paid out by her council over failures which resulted in her son missing out on four months of school.
Salford city council have now paid a mother of an autistic child more than £3,000 after an Ombudsman revealed the council's oversight.
The compensation, which was awarded by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, found that there was a 'delay and poor communication' by the council over the issuing the child's education and health care plan (EHCP).
It was also revealed the council - under the terms of the Children and Families Act 2014 - failed to provide alternative education for the boy once the authority was aware that he had been out of school for 15 days.
The youngster, who has been named as 'B', was diagnosed with autism in 2018 and experiences extreme agitation in noisy and busy environments, reports the Manchester Evening News.
His mother, 'Mrs X', said that B stopped attending School 'C' in early December 2020 because of his medical needs and inability to cope while at school.
After the council became aware of B's non-attendance, they requested for a special educational needs (SEN) assessment in late December 2020. Salford city council then agreed to the assessment and in May 2021 issued a draft Education, Health and Care Plan (EHC), followed by another in June 2021.
Despite issuing out two letters, the council claimed that Mrs X was 'slow to respond to the draft, or to name her preferred school and this caused some delay in the process'.
However, Mrs X said that she observed the requests outlined, and returned the comments on the very first day she received the draft.
The report by the Ombudsman read: "Mrs X says the council agreed to specialist provision and she visited various specialist schools.
"Mrs X says the council issued a second draft and she responded promptly, naming a particular school as her preferred choice. Mrs X had to approach a solicitor because of the delay in issuing a final EHC plan.
"The solicitor sent a pre-action protocol letter, threatening judicial review. Three days later, Mrs X says the council issued a final EHC plan.
"She paid £1,500 legal costs. The council issued a final EHC plan on July 30 2021, naming School C."
The report went on to outline that the mother did not accept that this was a suitable placement for her child, and so exercised her right of appeal to a Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Tribunal.
The report continued: "The council accepts that it breached the timescale of 20 weeks to finalise the EHC plan and that this delayed Mrs X's right of appeal to the SEND Tribunal.
"The council has already apologised to Mrs X for this and agrees in principle to make a symbolic payment to recognise the avoidable distress and lost opportunity to appeal sooner. It also accepted in its complaint response of July 2021 that its communication with Mrs X was poor.
"My view is that the delay and poor communication by the council amounts to fault. This caused avoidable frustration and this meant Mrs X's appeal to the SEND Tribunal has been slightly delayed.
"As Mrs X won her appeal, it might have been possible for B to attend his specialist school sooner."
Meanwhile, Mrs X asserted that she tried hard to obtain alternative provision because she knew that the longer B was out of school, the more difficult it would be for him to return.
She added that youngster had no interaction with his peers and became 'very withdrawn'.
The report said: "Mrs X says B is a bright pupil and missed being in education.
"Mrs X says that she had to approach a solicitor because the council was not providing alternative education for B, despite her request for this.
"The council says that it began to explore alternative provision - although it does not say when - as a way of supporting transition back into B's placement in School C. So, the exploring of alternative provision was to enhance the placement at School C rather than to replace it.
"The council considered it was not required to provide alternative education from March 2021. The council believed that B's support needs could be met in a mainstream school with a detailed EHC plan and additional resources attached to it.
"As from the end of July 2021, the council accepts it had a duty to provide what was detailed in B's final EHC plan. Most of the provision in the EHC plan relied on specialist input from school staff."
The Ombudsman said that in September 2021, the council commissioned two hours per day alternative provision for B from an approved provider (provider D).
The council said it was not in B's interests to have full-time education, and his attendance up to the October 2021 half-term was only 56 per cent.
The report said: "After the half-term his attendance was less.
"Mrs X told the council that B's anxiety was preventing him from attending. In addition, providers of alternative education were experiencing staff absences due to Covid-19 at this time.
"Mrs X says the provider D was not an autism specialist unit, so did not have the expertise to deal with B. It offered only two hours of interaction each day and B was very keen to have contact with his peers."
In December 2021, the family moved to another council area, where Salford passed responsibility to the new authority, including the SEND appeal.
Then in February/March 2022, B started at a specialist school for autistic children and Mrs X said 'he is doing well'.
The Ombudsman ordered Salford council to apologise and make a 'symbolic payment' of £350 to Mrs X for the injustice caused by the faults identified in the EHCP delay.
The council was further ordered to pay Mrs X £2,400 for B's four months missed education to be used for his educational benefit and a further £300 'symbolic payment'.
The Ombudsman added: "The council's policy does not set out a timeframe by which it expects Children and Families Act decisions to be made. This means that cases of children being out of education can easily drift.
"The council will consider adding a timetable to its policy for these decisions to be made."
