Summary: Miss P complained about the way the Council handled child protection matters relating to her children and how it responded to her complaint about those matters. She said it caused her considerable distress. There was fault by the Council that caused injustice to Miss P. The Council will apologise to her and make a payment.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Miss P. She complained about the way the Council handled child protection matters relating to her children and how it responded to her complaint about those matters. She said it caused her considerable distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Miss P. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Miss P and the Council and considered their comments.
5. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the relevant law and guidance

6. The Children Act 1989 (the Act) and statutory guidance Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out councils’ responsibilities to safeguard children.
7. Referrals may come from the child, agencies involved with children such as health and schools, concerned family members, friends, neighbours or members of the public. When the council accepts a referral, the social worker has the lead professional role. S/he should clarify with the referrer, where possible, what the concerns are and how and why they have arisen.

Initial assessment

8. The council should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family, for example, health visitor, GP, schools and nurseries. The information gathering at this stage enables the council to assess the nature and level of any harm the child may be facing. The assessment may result in:
• No further action
• A decision to carry out a more detailed assessment of the child’s needs
• A decision to convene a strategy meeting (see below).
9. The child and family must be informed of the action to be taken.
10. The social worker should see the child as soon as possible if the decision is that the referral requires further assessment.

Strategy discussion

11. Where initial assessment shows a child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm the council and the police hold a strategy discussion. This may be a telephone discussion. The purpose of a strategy discussion is to decide immediate safeguarding actions and to decide the extent of information giving, especially to parents. A strategy meeting may include other professionals involved with the child.
12. The lead agency (generally the Council, but sometimes Health) must see the child, seeking his or her views and record the outcome. Where the social worker decides emergency action is not needed they will meet with the family and agree plans to safeguard the child’s welfare. The child may be considered a child in need and safeguarding activity stopped.
13. In case where significant harm is still a concern, the strategy discussion:
• Shares information;
• Agrees the conduct and timing of any criminal investigation;
• Decides whether to make enquiries under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989.

Section 47 enquiries

14. The council has a maximum of 45 days to complete the assessment. Assessors should consider the child’s developmental needs, parenting capacity and family and environmental factors. The child’s interests come first. Where a particular need is identified during the assessment, the council should not wait for the assessment to be completed before commissioning services.
15. Local authority social workers lead assessments under section 47. The social worker should:
• Carry out enquiries in a way which minimises distress for the child and family;
• See the child to ascertain their wishes and feelings, assess their understanding of the situation and their relationships and circumstances;
• Interview parents/care-givers and determine the wider social and environmental factors which impact on the family;
• Gather information about the child and family’s history;
• With other professionals, analyse the findings of the assessment and evidence about what interventions are likely to be effective. This is to determine the child’s needs, the level of risk faced, to inform what help should be provided and act to provide that help;
16. If the information gathered under section 47 substantiates concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm the social worker will arrange a child protection conference within 15 working days of the strategy meeting.

What happened

17. The independent domestic violence advocate (IDVA) who was working with Miss P made a safeguarding referral about her two children to the Council. This said that Miss P’s partner, Mr R, was controlling and was verbally abusive to her and the children. It said any contact should be through the IDVA as any contact with Mr R would increase the risk of harm to Miss P and the children. Also, that Mr R would answer Miss P’s phone so it was important to establish it was her speaking.
18. The case was allocated to a social worker, Officer X. He contacted the referring IDVA and discussed the case. He then met with Miss P at one of the children’s schools. The school was aware of the home situation and was supportive of Miss P. The Council was not able to say how this meeting came about as the relevant officers had left the Council. Miss P said it was sprung upon her without contact through the IDVA.
19. A few days later Officer X held a strategy meeting with the police and a team manager. It was agreed to proceed to S47 assessment and an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC). File notes show Officer X contacted the police a couple of times over the remainder of the month but there had been no significant action.
20. Shortly afterwards Officer X telephoned Miss P to invite her to the ICPC. She could not talk and ended the call. The Council then wrote a letter addressed to both Miss P and Mr R inviting them to the ICPC a few days later.
21. Mr R opened the letter and confronted Miss P. She contacted the national domestic abuse helpline as the only support available on a Saturday. They in turn contacted the emergency duty team at the Council who contacted Officer X. Officer X’s notes show he called back the helpline back but Miss P understood there was no contact.
22. On the Monday Miss P spoke to a senior officer at the Council. The Council provided no record of that conversation. Miss P said the officer would not cancel the ICPC but when Miss P explained the risk it posed to her and her children she reluctantly agreed to try to do so. Notes by Officer X show the ICPC was cancelled and show no other action. Miss P reports there was contact from him later in that same month.
23. The only information the Council provided about this is a closure report dated at the end of the following month. This was written by a different officer to the one Miss P spoke to. The report was critical of the assessment by Officer X.
24. Miss P immediately complained about what had happened and particularly about the conduct of Officer X. The Council responded to the complaint two months later. The complaint response did not provide any response to the detailed points Miss P had raised. It accepted there had been some fault and concluded there was some learning points for the Council.
25. In responding to us the Council said much of the complaint centred around the approach and attitude of a particular social worker and his professional assessment, meaning it was difficult to respond in depth because that was his professional analysis and the content of a social work assessment does not get changed. And, as the complaint related more to professional conduct, the Council did not consider it appropriate for the statutory procedure.
26. Miss P made a further complaint. The Council has commented it decided not to respond as it considered there was nothing of any value to be gained by a further response. It did not tell Miss P that was its position. Miss P commented that she chased a senior officer at the Council several times for a response but was not told a decision had been made not to respond.

Analysis

27. The crux of this complaint is the Council’s handling of the referral from the IDVA. The Council’s own closure report on the application is highly critical of the action taken. It said:
• the officer had acted without appropriate consultation with the team manager;
• he had wrongly said that Miss P had refused to engage which was not the case;
• the assessment was of poor quality and evidentially it was not appropriate to escalate the case; and
• there had not be any meaningful engagement with partner agencies.
28. Based on the Council’s own findings I consider this shows fault in how the Council handled the referral and the subsequent decision to proceed to an ICPC. I do not know when Miss P knew the case was closed but the uncertainty about this would have added to her distress.
29. There was further significant fault in sending the letter addressed to both Miss P and her partner when it was clear there should be no contact with him because of the risk that could pose for Miss P and the children.
30. There was also fault in how the Council responded to Miss P’s complaint. The first response did not address in any meaningful way the points Miss P had made, even though the Council had itself identified significant faults. The Council should have sent a detailed response to Miss P’s complaints and considered whether any remedy was appropriate. The fact that some of the complaints related to an officer’s professional assessment was not a reason why it should not be considered by the Council. The Council then failed to respond to her further correspondence.
31. Where there has been fault we consider what injustice that has caused to the complainant. I do not doubt the faults I refer to above caused considerable distress and worry to Miss P. In addition, sending the letter addressed to Mr R put the family at risk. The poor complaint response added to the injustice to Miss P.

Agreed action

32. The Council will apologise to Miss P and pay her £1000 to remedy the injustice to her. It should do so within a month of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

33. There was fault by the Council that caused injustice to Miss P.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman