The duty, in one line
Local authorities must arrange suitable, normally full-time education for any child who cannot attend school through illness, exclusion or other reasons — including anxiety-driven absence — even without a diagnosis. That duty sits in section 19 of the Education Act 1996. It bites whenever a child of compulsory school age would not, for any period, receive suitable education unless the authority makes the arrangements. ‘Suitable’ means efficient education suited to the child’s age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs they have (s.19(6)).
Who owes it, and what triggers it
The duty is owed by the local authority itself, not by the school, and it is not delegable to a setting. It is not contingent on a diagnosis, an EHC plan, or the school’s agreement. It turns on one test: can the child receive suitable education without the authority stepping in? If the answer is no, the duty is engaged.
The statute names three routes in: illness, exclusion, or ‘otherwise’. The third word does the heavy lifting. ‘Otherwise’ is a broad category covering any circumstance in which it is not reasonably possible for the child to take up existing suitable schooling. The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has repeatedly found that an authority owes the section 19 duty where a child is out of school because of anxiety or a phobia. This is the trigger most often missed, because anxiety-driven non-attendance gets logged as unauthorised absence or treated as a parenting matter rather than a triggered statutory duty.
The thresholds an officer acts on
There is no single absolute legal deadline, but the December 2023 DfE statutory guidance sets clear markers. Where it is clear a child will miss 15 school days or more because of health needs, whether in one block or added up across the year, the authority should arrange suitable alternative provision, starting as soon as possible. For a permanently excluded pupil, the authority must arrange suitable full-time education to begin no later than the sixth school day of the exclusion.
- Provision must be full-time unless, for reasons relating to the child’s own physical or mental health, full-time would not be in their best interests.
- A reduced or part-time package has to be justified by the child’s health, not by the authority’s capacity or budget.
- The duty applies whether or not the child is on a school’s roll.
Why this matters, and the reform on the horizon
Wrongly withholding the duty leaves a child of compulsory school age with no education at all, and the authority carrying the breach. Reform is coming. The 2026 Schools White Paper and the Education for All Bill propose Individual Support Plans and a narrower EHCP for the most complex needs. But the section 19 duty is not proposed for repeal, no changes take effect before September 2030, and current plan holders are protected. Section 19 is current law today. Treat it as live.
For how this sits alongside the wider statutory framework, see a local authority’s duties under the Children and Families Act 2014, the duty to secure Section F provision, and the duty to maintain an EHCP.
Where the law comes from
Related
This page is general information, not clinical or legal advice.