The EHCP Provision Is Not Being Delivered: What Happens Next?
An Education, Health and Care Plan is not simply a description of the support a child might benefit from.
Once special educational provision is specified in Section F, the Local Authority has a legal duty to secure it.
Yet many parents discover that parts of the EHCP are not being delivered. They may be told:
the school does not have enough funding;
a teaching assistant is absent;
the therapist has a waiting list;
the provision cannot be delivered while the child is at home;
the school is “doing its best”;
the support is available, but not at the frequency written in the plan; or
the Local Authority has delegated responsibility to the school.
These explanations may describe why the provision is missing. They do not necessarily remove the Local Authority’s duty to secure it.
Recent Ombudsman decisions continue to find councils at fault where children have gone without the provision written into their EHCPs.
Start with the exact wording of Section F
Before challenging non-delivery, identify precisely what the EHCP requires.
Section F should specify the special educational provision necessary to meet each need identified in Section B. It should make clear:
what support will be provided;
how often it will happen;
how long each session will last;
whether it will be individual or group-based;
who will deliver it;
what qualifications or experience are required;
how programmes will be monitored; and
how frequently progress will be reviewed.
Provision such as “access to support,” “regular opportunities,” “as required” or “when available” is difficult to monitor and enforce because it does not establish a clear entitlement.
Government guidance and Local Authority EHCP guidance both emphasise that Section F provision should be clear, specific and quantified.
If Section F is vague, there may be two separate problems:
The provision currently written in the plan is not being delivered.
The EHCP itself does not specify enough provision to meet the child’s needs.
The first may require enforcement or a complaint. The second may require an annual review, amendment and potentially a tribunal appeal.
What counts as non-delivery?
Non-delivery is not limited to a complete absence of support.
It may include:
fewer hours of individual support than the EHCP specifies;
therapy being provided less frequently than required;
an unqualified member of staff delivering specialist provision;
a programme being delivered without professional oversight;
group support being substituted for individual provision;
support beginning months after the final EHCP was issued;
provision repeatedly cancelled because of staffing problems;
a child being sent home during the hours when support should be available;
the school relying on general classroom differentiation instead of the specified intervention;
support being available only if the child requests it, despite the EHCP requiring proactive provision; or
the provision stopping because the child is unable to attend the named placement.
The correct comparison is between what Section F actually says and what the child is actually receiving.
Do not allow the discussion to become limited to whether the school is providing “some support.” The question is whether it is securing the provision specified in the EHCP.
Create a provision audit
A simple provision audit can turn a general concern into clear evidence.
Use a table with four columns:
Section F requiresWhat is actually happeningEvidenceAction required30 minutes of direct SALT each weekNo direct sessions for eight weeksTherapist email and school recordsRestart weekly sessions and address missed provisionFull-time individual supportSupport shared between three pupilsTimetable and school emailConfirm how full-time support will be securedOT programme delivered daily and reviewed termlyProgramme delivered irregularly; no review this yearHome-school recordsArrange OT review and implement daily programmeSpecialist literacy teaching three times weeklyOne general intervention each weekProvision mapDeliver the specified frequency and method
Complete the table using the wording of the final EHCP—not what was discussed during meetings or recommended in reports but omitted from the plan.
Attach supporting records where available.
Useful evidence may include:
school timetables;
provision maps;
therapy records;
communication books;
attendance records;
emails from the SENCO;
invoices or records from commissioned providers;
annual review documents;
professional reports;
records of cancelled sessions;
the child’s work or progress data; and
a dated parental record of what has and has not happened.
Parents do not have to prove every missed session before raising the issue. However, clear examples and records make it harder for the problem to be dismissed as a misunderstanding.
Ask the school for a written delivery record
Begin by asking the school or college to confirm how each part of Section F is currently being delivered.
Request:
The child’s current provision timetable.
The name or role of the person delivering each element.
The frequency and duration of each intervention.
Records of sessions already delivered.
Details of any provision that has not been delivered.
The reason for the non-delivery.
The date on which full delivery will begin.
How missed provision will be addressed.
How progress is being monitored.
Whether the school has informed the Local Authority of any difficulty implementing the EHCP.
Keep the request factual.
The immediate purpose is to establish whether the school accepts that there is a gap and whether it has a credible plan to correct it.
Notify the Local Authority directly
Do not rely only on discussions with the school.
The duty to secure the special educational provision in Section F rests with the Local Authority maintaining the EHCP. Ombudsman decisions have repeatedly found councils at fault where the evidence did not show that the provision had been delivered.
Write to the EHCP caseworker and copy in:
the SEND team manager;
the school SENCO or headteacher;
any relevant commissioning officer; and
the therapist or provider, where appropriate.
Attach the provision audit and ask the Local Authority to confirm:
whether it accepts that each identified element is not being delivered;
what immediate action it will take;
who is responsible for arranging it;
the date full provision will begin;
how missed provision will be remedied;
how delivery will be monitored; and
whether it believes the EHCP now requires amendment.
Suggested wording
Subject: Failure to secure Section F provision
My child’s final EHCP dated [date] specifies the following special educational provision in Section F:
[Set out the relevant provision precisely.]
This provision is not currently being delivered as written. In particular:
[Briefly list what is missing, reduced or being delivered differently.]
I attach a provision audit and the supporting evidence currently available.
Please confirm within five working days:
Whether the Local Authority accepts that the identified provision is not being delivered.
What immediate arrangements will be made to secure it.
Who will deliver each outstanding element.
The date full delivery will begin.
How the Local Authority proposes to address the provision already missed.
How delivery will be monitored going forward.
Whether an urgent annual review or amendment of the EHCP is proposed.
As the Local Authority maintains the EHCP, I am asking it to take direct responsibility for securing the provision specified in Section F.
“The school does not have the funding”
Funding disputes should not be allowed to replace the child’s entitlement.
A school may genuinely believe that the funding it receives is insufficient. It may need additional resources, commissioned support or a review of the placement.
Those issues must be resolved between the school and the Local Authority.
The child should not simply receive less provision because the organisations responsible disagree about how it will be funded. The Local Authority’s duty concerns securing the provision specified in Section F, not merely allocating a particular sum of money and treating the matter as complete.
Parents do not generally need to calculate the hourly cost of every intervention before requiring the plan to be implemented.
The starting point is the legal provision written in the EHCP.
“There are no staff available”
Staff absence, recruitment problems and waiting lists are common explanations for missing provision.
They may justify a brief and unavoidable disruption in exceptional circumstances. They should not become an indefinite suspension of the EHCP.
Ask:
What alternative arrangements have been considered?
Can another provider be commissioned?
Can suitably qualified temporary staff be used?
Can provision be delivered at another location?
Can direct work begin while recruitment continues?
Can missed sessions be replaced?
What is the confirmed date for resolving the staffing problem?
An internal staffing problem does not amend Section F.
If the provision can no longer be delivered in the current placement, that may also raise a larger question about whether the placement remains suitable.
Therapy may form part of Section F
Parents are sometimes told that speech and language therapy or occupational therapy is solely an NHS responsibility.
That is not always correct.
Where therapy educates or trains the child or young person, it may be treated as special educational provision and included in Section F. Government funding guidance specifically recognises that therapies such as speech and language therapy, occupational therapy and physiotherapy may be deemed educational provision, depending on the individual circumstances.
Where therapy appears in Section F, the Local Authority cannot simply direct the parent to an NHS waiting list and take no further action.
Provision in Section G is health provision and involves the relevant health commissioning body. Provision in Section F is special educational provision and falls within the Local Authority’s duty to secure it.
Always check which section contains the therapy and exactly how it is described.
What if the child is not attending school?
Section F does not automatically disappear because a child is unable to attend the named school.
This is particularly important for children experiencing:
emotionally based school avoidance;
severe anxiety;
trauma;
medical absence;
exclusion;
placement breakdown; or
an extended period without a suitable school.
The Local Authority should consider how the specified provision can be delivered in the child’s actual circumstances.
Where a child of compulsory school age would otherwise receive no suitable education, the Local Authority may also have a separate duty to arrange suitable education under Section 19 of the Education Act 1996.
These are related but distinct questions:
How will the provision in Section F be secured?
What suitable education will the child receive while unable to attend school?
Ombudsman decisions have found fault where councils failed both to secure EHCP provision and to arrange suitable education for children who were out of school.
Should you request an urgent annual review?
An urgent annual review may be appropriate where:
the missing provision shows that the plan is no longer workable;
the child’s needs have changed;
the school says it cannot deliver the EHCP;
the placement is breaking down;
additional provision is required;
professional advice is out of date; or
a different placement or EOTAS package may need to be considered.
However, an annual review should not be used as an excuse to delay implementing the existing plan.
Until the EHCP is formally amended, the current final plan remains in force.
The Local Authority should therefore address the immediate non-delivery while separately reviewing whether the EHCP requires change.
Ask two questions:
What will be done now to deliver the existing Section F?
What longer-term amendments may be required?
What if the EHCP wording is too vague to enforce?
Sometimes the Local Authority or school says the provision is being delivered, but the wording is so vague that it is almost impossible to establish what compliance means.
For example:
“access to adult support”;
“regular sensory breaks”;
“opportunities for therapeutic input”;
“support from appropriately trained staff”;
“small-group work where appropriate”; or
“a differentiated curriculum.”
In that situation, an implementation complaint alone may not solve the underlying problem.
You may need to seek amendments so that Section F clearly states:
the amount;
the frequency;
the duration;
the group size;
the expertise required;
the delivery method; and
the review arrangements.
A parent can appeal the educational contents of an EHCP, including Sections B and F, following an appealable Local Authority decision. Current government guidance confirms that parents can challenge the special educational support specified in a final plan.
Do not confuse these two arguments:
“The existing provision has not been delivered.”
and:
“The existing provision is insufficient or too vague.”
They may both be true, but they require different remedies.
Complaint or tribunal appeal?
This distinction is crucial.
A complaint is generally appropriate where:
the Local Authority is not securing provision already specified in Section F;
provision began late;
sessions were repeatedly missed;
the council failed to monitor delivery;
communication has been poor;
agreed action was not completed; or
the child has lost provision because of administrative failure.
A tribunal appeal is generally appropriate where:
Section B does not accurately describe the child’s needs;
Section F does not contain enough provision;
the wording is vague or unquantified;
the wrong type of provision has been specified;
Section I names an unsuitable placement; or
the Local Authority has refused to amend the EHCP.
A parent may sometimes need to pursue both routes for separate issues.
For example, the parent may appeal because the plan only specifies one therapy session each term while also complaining that even that limited provision has not been delivered.
The Ombudsman may decline to investigate where the complaint is inseparable from the contents of the EHCP and it was reasonable to use a tribunal appeal.
Protect any tribunal deadline even while a complaint is ongoing.
Making a formal complaint
If the Local Authority does not put the provision in place after your initial escalation, submit a formal complaint.
Structure it around:
The legal document
Quote the relevant parts of Section F.The failure
Explain exactly what has not been delivered and for how long.The evidence
Attach the provision audit, emails and available records.The impact
Explain the effect on learning, communication, emotional regulation, independence, attendance or wellbeing.The required action
Ask for immediate delivery, monitoring and a remedy for missed provision.
You may request:
a formal finding about whether Section F was delivered;
immediate commissioning of the missing provision;
a named officer responsible for resolving the issue;
a written delivery timetable;
replacement or additional sessions where appropriate;
an urgent annual review;
reimbursement of evidenced costs where you had to obtain necessary provision privately;
recognition of the child’s lost provision; and
service improvements to prevent recurrence.
The Ombudsman has recommended apologies, financial remedies and corrective action where councils failed to secure EHCP provision.
A financial payment is not a substitute for delivering the provision now. The immediate priority remains implementation.
Keep a record of the effect on your child
Do not record only the number of missed sessions.
Also record the consequences.
These might include:
loss of academic progress;
regression in communication or independence;
increased anxiety or dysregulation;
reduced attendance;
exclusion or placement instability;
inability to access lessons;
greater dependence on family members;
deterioration in relationships;
loss of confidence;
privately funded support; or
the parent reducing work to provide support.
This information may be relevant when explaining the urgency, requesting remedial provision or pursuing a complaint.
Avoid exaggeration. A clear, dated and credible account is more persuasive than broad statements that cannot be linked to the missing provision.
What if the council says the school is responsible?
Schools have important duties and will normally deliver much of the provision in an EHCP.
But where the Local Authority maintains the EHCP, it cannot simply remove itself from the situation by telling the parent to resolve the matter with the school.
Ask the council:
What has it done to establish whether the provision is being delivered?
When did it contact the school?
What records has it reviewed?
What corrective action has it required?
What alternative provider has it considered?
When will it check compliance again?
The Local Authority should maintain meaningful oversight where it has been told that legally specified provision is missing.
A repeated response of “speak to the SENCO” is not an adequate resolution where the school has already confirmed that it cannot deliver the plan.
What if the provision was ordered by the Tribunal?
Where the SEND Tribunal orders amendments to Sections B or F, the Local Authority must normally make those changes within five weeks.
Where it orders a change to the school or placement in Section I, the Local Authority must normally act within two weeks. Government guidance also confirms that a complaint may be made to the Ombudsman if the Local Authority fails to act on a successful tribunal decision.
Keep:
the tribunal decision;
the final working document;
the amended EHCP;
the date by which the order should have been implemented; and
evidence of what remains outstanding.
If the Local Authority has not complied, escalate the matter immediately rather than treating the order as the end of the process.
When may urgent legal action be needed?
Where serious non-delivery continues and the complaints process will not provide a sufficiently quick remedy, specialist public-law advice may be required.
Judicial review can be used to challenge the lawfulness of a public body’s action or failure to act. It is generally a remedy of last resort where no adequate alternative remedy is available, and claims must be brought promptly. The Judicial Review Pre-Action Protocol explains that a letter before claim will normally identify the duty, breach and action required before proceedings are issued.
This is specialist legal work.
Parents should obtain advice promptly where:
essential provision has stopped completely;
the child is suffering serious ongoing harm;
the council accepts the duty but refuses to act;
the child has no education;
a tribunal order is being ignored; or
delay is making the eventual remedy ineffective.
Do not threaten judicial review casually in an ordinary complaint. A properly framed pre-action letter is different from writing “I will take legal action” at the end of an email.
A practical escalation sequence
When Section F is not being delivered:
Read the exact wording of the final EHCP.
Identify each missing or reduced element.
Create a provision audit.
Ask the school for written delivery records.
Notify the Local Authority directly.
Request immediate action and firm dates.
Record the educational impact.
Request an urgent annual review if the plan or placement may need to change.
Make a formal complaint if delivery is not restored.
Protect any tribunal appeal rights.
Consider the Ombudsman after the council’s complaints process.
Seek urgent public-law advice where serious continuing harm requires faster action.
The goal is not merely to establish that someone has failed.
It is to secure the provision your child needs and prevent the failure from continuing.
An EHCP must work in practice
A detailed EHCP has little value if the provision remains on paper.
Parents should not be left indefinitely negotiating between a school, Local Authority, therapy provider and health service while each points to another organisation.
Establish:
what Section F requires;
what is missing;
who must arrange it;
what immediate remedy is needed;
whether the EHCP itself must change; and
which escalation route is most likely to produce action.
Need clarity about what to do next?
My Initial Case Review examines your child’s EHCP, the provision currently being delivered and the supporting correspondence and evidence.
You will receive a clear assessment of:
which parts of Section F are not being implemented;
whether the EHCP wording is sufficiently clear and enforceable;
what should be requested from the school and Local Authority;
whether an urgent annual review or amendment is needed;
whether the issue requires a complaint, tribunal appeal or separate legal escalation; and
what evidence should be preserved.
This article provides general information about the law in England. It is not a substitute for legal advice on an individual case.