Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions and decision when her children went into foster care between February and June 2018 after a court made them subject to an interim care order. The Council was at fault. It delayed carrying out relevant assessments on family members which meant the children stayed in foster care for longer than necessary. It further failed to adequately communicate with Miss X, promote contact with the children or consider her views. It then delayed dealing with her complaint into the matter for over a year. The Council agreed to pay Miss X a total of £1550 to remedy the distress, uncertainty and time and trouble caused by the Council’s faults.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s actions after a court made her children subject to an interim care order and they went into foster care. She said the Council failed to communicate with her about matters or promote adequate contact with her children for the period they lived in foster care between February and June 2018. Miss X said the children spent longer in foster care than necessary and the Council delayed investigating her complaint into the matter by over a year.
2. Miss X said the Council’s handling of matters when her children were in foster care caused her significant distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
5. 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)
6. 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

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered Miss X’s complaint and the information she provided.
8. I considered the Council’s stage 2 investigation into Miss X’s complaint.
9. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiry letter.
10. I considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
11. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Looked after children

12. A Looked After Child (LAC) is any child who is subject to a care order or accommodated away from their family by a council under section 20 of the Children Act 1989.
13. The council is responsible for the safeguarding and wellbeing of all looked after children in its care. There are a number of ways that children become ‘looked after’ by the council. One is when a court grants an interim care order. This is when the judge decides to place the child in the care of the council before making a final judgement.
14. Children who are looked after by a council may be placed in foster care. A looked after child may be voluntarily accommodated under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 or may the subject of a legal order such as a care order under section 31 of the Children Act. Foster care arrangements may be short or long term.
15. Parents keep their parental responsibility even when a child is accommodated under a care order. They have a right to be told and consulted about all decisions.
16. The law says councils must allow the child or children who are the subject of the care order reasonable contact with their parents. The council has a general duty to promote contact with wider family members such as grandparents or siblings. If a parent is unhappy with the level of contact the council allows, they can try to resolve the situation by talking to the child or children’s social worker. If they cannot resolve the situation in this way, then they can apply to the court for an order for contact with a child in care.

Education

17. Under s22(3A) of the Children Act 1989 councils are under a duty to promote the educational achievement of looked after children including a looked after child aged 16 or 17. This duty applies to children placed for adoption until the court makes the adoption order, and includes those children placed out of authority. The key principle is that councils should try to minimise disruption to a child’s education when arranging care placements.

What happened

Background

18. Miss X has four children. In 2018 three of the children were of pre-school age and the other, child F, of secondary school age. Miss X did not live with the children’s father.
19. In February 2018 Miss X took one of the children to the doctors. Miss X told the doctor that the child had fallen in their cot which had led to bruising. The doctor examined the child and found further bruising so they asked Miss X to take them to hospital for further assessment.
20. Following assessment at hospital the three youngest children were made subject of a Police Protection Order (PPO) and placed into foster care. F was located in a different council area living with his father and was also taken into foster care under the PPO.
21. The three youngest children were made subject of an interim care order following a court hearing. F was placed into the care of his father and continued living in a different council area. The three youngest children were placed with a new foster carer and allocated a social worker. The court ordered the Council to carry out assessments on the children’s paternal aunt before the end of April 2018 with a view to her caring for the children instead of a foster carer.
22. The Council completed its assessment of the children’s aunt at the start of May 2018. The Court however decided the social worker’s assessment was not good enough and asked for an addendum report which caused further delays. This meant the social worker did not complete the assessment until the end of May. The assessment of the aunt was positive and in June 2018 the children moved into her care.
23. In July 2018 the court found the injuries to the children were accidental and happened in line with Miss X’s initial explanation. Therefore, the children moved back to her care and the court ordered the end of social care involvement.

Miss X’s 2018 complaint to the Council

24. Miss X complained to the Council in September 2018 about the Council’s actions leading to her children being placed in foster care as well as its actions whilst they were in care. She complained about the Council’s decision to remove the children from her care and that it refused to let her say goodbye to them. Miss X said the Council refused and then delayed assessing the children’s paternal aunt which caused the children to stay in foster care longer than necessary. Miss X also complained the social workers did not communicate with her when the children went into foster care and did not keep her updated about the process. She said the Council restricted her time visiting the children at the foster carer. She said the foster care cut her youngest child’s hair for the first time without consulting her.
25. The Council wrote to Miss X and said it recommended a face-to-face meeting with a senior officer from children’s services to discuss her complaint. The Council said it would arrange a meeting shortly. However, the Council did not arrange a meeting and nobody contacted Miss X further.

Miss X’s 2019 complaint to the Council

26. Miss X contacted the Council again in September 2019 about her complaint because nobody had contacted her further. The Council apologised for not arranging the meeting in 2018 as agreed. It decided to carry out a stage 2 complaint investigation into her complaint with independent oversight. The Council began its investigation in January 2020.
27. The Council concluded its stage 2 investigation into Miss X’s complaint in March 2020. It upheld the following:
• The children were not offered the opportunity to say goodbye to Miss X when they were taken into care and there was no evidence of a phone call to Miss X to offer any reassurance.
• The social worker failed to adequately communicate with Miss X for the period they remained in foster care.
• The social worker failed to keep Miss X informed and up to date with the court process.
• The social worker significantly delayed in assessing family members which meant the children remained in foster care for longer than necessary.
• The foster carer restricted Miss X’s time with the children and created barriers for her to understand how they were caring for the children. There was limited time for a face-to-discussion of the children’s welfare.
• The Council failed to adequately consider Miss X’s views on the children’s upbringing.
• The Council failed to give F access to their siblings during the time they were in foster care.
• The Council failed to support F with education between February and April 2018.
• The Council offered no apology or acknowledgement of the distress caused to the children or Miss X once the children went back to her care.
28. The stage 2 investigation made recommendations for the Council to consider learning from the complaint and to understand why things happened in the way they did. It recommended learning around communication between social workers, foster carers and parents. It also recommended the Council source and fund therapy for Miss X and the children.
29. The Council agreed with the outcome of the stage 2 investigation and agreed with the recommendations.
30. Miss X said the offer of therapy was too late and declined the offer. Since the conclusion of Miss X’s complaint the Council has designed a new corporate parenting service which gives a therapeutic approach to returning children to families with clinical oversight and supervision. The Council said it will upskill social workers in therapeutic practice with children and their families to ensure that there remains good communication between the Council and families when children become looked after.

My findings

31. I have not investigated or considered events leading up to the children entering foster care under a PPO or the decision to place the children into foster care under the interim care order. This is because we cannot consider matters which have been considered by a court. So, I have only considered what happened during the period the children were in foster care between February and June 2018.
32. The Council carried out a robust, thorough and proportionate stage 2 investigation which upheld all of Miss X’s complaints. Miss X has not complained about the findings or adequacy of the stage 2 investigation. Therefore, I have not re-investigated Miss X’s complaints. I have instead considered the injustice caused to Miss X and made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.
33. The Council has accepted fault in how it dealt with Miss X and her children which I have outlined in paragraph 27. Further to these faults I find further fault with how the Council handled Miss X’s initial complaint. It accepted her complaint but failed to setup the meeting with her as it agreed. This caused Miss X uncertainty and the time and trouble chasing the matter during 2019. It meant there was a significant delay of over a year before the Council investigated her complaint.
34. The faults identified caused Miss X significant distress and uncertainty. I also consider the faults caused all the children unnecessary additional distress in what was already a difficult matter. The stage 2 investigation found the children remained in foster care for longer than necessary and had their contact with Miss X restricted. The Council has offered no remedy for the injustice caused other than therapy which Miss X says was offered too late due to the delay in investigating her complaints.
35. I therefore made further recommendations below to remedy the injustice caused to Miss X and the four children.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to:
• pay Miss X £1000 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused to her and the four children by the Council’s poor handling of matters when the children were taken into foster care between February and June 2018.
• pay Miss X £300 to remedy the loss of educational opportunity caused to F when the Council failed to support him in education between February and April 2018. Miss X should use the payment for F’s educational benefit.
• pay Miss X £250 to remedy the uncertainty and time and trouble caused to her by the Council’s delay in handling her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I completed my investigation. I found fault and the Council agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice caused by the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman