NHS in England Not Upheld Search on PHSO website

Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board

P-004651 · Report · Decision date: 21 January 2026 · View NHS Coventry and Warwickshire ICB scorecard
Complaint (AI summary)
The ICB failed to provide sufficient trained staff to meet her son's EHCP needs for epilepsy recognition and treatment, causing worry, fear, and missed education.
Outcome (AI summary)
The complaint was not upheld. The ombudsman found the ICB appropriately upheld its duties and facilitated what was written in the Education and Health Care Plan.

Full decision details

The Complaint

3. Mrs P complains about the service provided by the Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board (the ICB), in its failure to provide the provisions needed for her son, Child A’s, Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) from October 2022 to September 2023.

4. The EHCP says that ‘he needs staff trained in epilepsy recognition and treatment to observe and time every seizure (essential for giving treatment) and to maintain a seizure log’.

5. Mrs P says originally there were no members of staff trained in this provision, however when she complained, it was ensured that there was one member of staff trained. Mrs P explained that this member of staff is not always available, and this still does not uphold her son’s EHCP.

6. Mrs P explained that this has led to increased worry and fear about what will happen if this specific member of staff is on leave or is unavailable. Mrs P says that this worry and fear is still ongoing as the provision is still not being met.

7. Mrs P says that her son has also been unable to attend school when there has been no staff member available as it is unsafe for him. This has meant he has missed out on some of his education.

8. She feels that given her son’s needs, and what may happen if there is a delay in him receiving treatment, the ICB should not have agreed that having only one member of staff trained and this being as voluntary position is upholding the EHCP.

9. Mrs P would like the ICB to take accountability in failing to provide her son with the appropriately trained staff.

Background

10. Mrs P’s son, Child A, has epilepsy and experiences seizures regularly. As a result of this, he has an EHCP. Within his EHCP it explains that Child A requires medication to be administered if he has a seizure at school and he also needs his seizures to be timed.

11. On 19 January 2021, Child A’s EHCP was finalised and was passed on to the ICB, the local authority, and Child A’s school.

12. In October 2022 Mrs P became aware that there were some occasions at school where there was no one on site to provide Child A with his medication if he had a seizure.

13. Mrs P wrote to the ICB on 27 January 2023 about this. In September 2023 the school agreed to provide staff trained on a voluntary basis in school to administer Child A’s medication and monitor his seizures.

Findings

18. An EHCP is a legal document that sets out a child or young person's special educational, health and social care needs and how those needs should be met.

19. The Children and Families Act explains that an EHCP is a plan specifying the child's or young person's special educational need, the outcomes sought, the special educational provision required, any health care provision reasonably required, and any social care provision reasonably required. The Act states that it is the Local Authority’s responsibility to prepare the EHCP, agree this with all parties, and review and maintain the plan, including making any changes.

20. Child A’s EHCP explains in section F that he needs ‘access to appropriate support to meet his medical needs of epilepsy as detailed in section G’. It then explains in section G that ‘Child A needs help with the management of his epilepsy (cluster focal and Tonic Clonic seizures), Child A has a protocol in school for administrating buccal midazolam (5mg) in emergency’.

21. It continues that ‘he needs staff trained in epilepsy recognition and treatment to observe and time every seizure (essential for giving treatment) and to maintain a seizure log – what happened, how long was it, what treatment was given.’

22. Mrs P explained that Child A’s school have implemented this training on a voluntary basis and that there is no staff member who is always in Child A’s classroom or allocated to manage or observe Child A specifically.

23. Mrs P told us that she feels that as Child A’s EHCP says that he ‘needs’ staff trained in the management of his seizures the provision should not be provided on a voluntary basis. She feels that it is not appropriate for the ICB to agree that staff trained on a voluntary basis is enough.

24. Mrs P told us that this is stressful for her, as she worries what will happen if the member of staff is not on site or if no one volunteers to fulfil this position in the future.

25. In its complaint response on 29 September 2023, the ICB explained that it was satisfied that the children’s community nursing team have offered appropriate training to staff at Child A’s school as per the wording of section G of the EHCP. It confirmed that there are two members of staff trained in the management of Child A’s seizures at the school.

26. The SEND code of practice outlines how health and local authority organisations must work alongside each other to ensure that the provisions outlined in EHCP’Ss are being upheld. It says that ‘for health care provision specified in the EHC plan, the CCG (or where relevant NHS England) must ensure that it is made available to the child or young person.’

27. It continues that ‘as health service commissioners, CCG’s (now known as ICB’s) have a duty under Section 3 of the NHS act 2006 to arrange health care provision for the people for whom they are responsible to meet their reasonable health needs.’

28. The Children and Families Act also says that ‘if the plan specifies health care provision, the responsible commissioning body must arrange the specified health care provision for the child or young person’.

29. Our adviser explained that in line with the Children and Families Act and the SEND code of practice it is the responsibility of the ICB to ensure any health care provisions outlined in an EHCP are fulfilled.

30. Child A’s ECHP does not explain how many staff should be trained, what the training of the staff should look like, or if it should be on a voluntary basis or not. The ECHP explains that Child A must have staff trained in the management of his seizures. The ICB have confirmed with Child A’s school that there are two members of staff trained in the management of his seizures.

31. The EHCP outlines what should happen if Child A has a seizure at school and a trained member of staff is available. It does not outline what should happen if there are no trained members of staff available.

32. Mrs P explained to us that she asked the ICB what would happen in this situation, and it explained to her that the school confirmed that it would call an ambulance for Child A. Mrs P told us that this is not a suitable plan for this situation, as if Child A has a long seizure, and is not given his medication promptly, it could cause him brain damage.

33. Our adviser explained that the ICB could have gone back to the local authority who wrote the EHCP and asked for a plan for if this situation arises to be written into the EHCP. It did not do so.

34. However, as specified above, the Children and Families Act states it is the Local Authority’s responsibility to review and maintain the plan. The ICB does not have any legal obligation to ask the Local Authority for further information than what is already written in the EHCP. It would be the responsibility of the Local Authority to write any further information on Child A’s needs into the EHCP.

35. We therefore consider that the ICB have upheld its duties by ensuring that there are staff trained in the management of Child A’s seizures at school. Although we understand Mrs P’S concerns about what would happen if Child A had a seizure at school and no staff were available to support him, it is not the responsibility of the ICB to ask the local authority for further information than what is written in the EHCP.

36. We recognise that this decision may be disappointing for Mrs P to read, and we understand that is it worrying for her to be without a clear plan in Child A’s EHCP to accommodate for if the trained staff members are not available.

37. The ICB have upheld its responsibilities by confirming that there are staff members trained in the management of Child A’s seizures at school.

38. We would like to thank Mrs P for taking the time to bring her complaint to us and for her continued patience throughout this process. We wish her all the best with any ongoing support she may seek for Child A at school.

Our Decision

1. We would like to thank Mrs P for taking the time to bring her complaint to us. We understand that she has had frustrating experiences while under the care of Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board (the ICB) and that these will have caused her stress.

2. We have found that the ICB have appropriately upheld its duties and facilitated what is written in the Education, Health, and Care Plan (ECHP). We will therefore not be upholding this complaint.

Other Decisions About Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board

P-004924 · 26 Feb 2026
Mr M complains the ICB has been unclear about why it declined a request for funding and says the OUH …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-002380 · 20 Dec 2023
Dr U complains the ICB failed to give his daughter the respite care that is part of her care plan.
Closed After Initial Enquiries
View all decisions for this organisation →