Summary: There is no fault in how the Council assessed and reported on the child protection concerns about Miss X’s children. There is some fault in the Council’s failure to consider whether Miss X needed any reasonable adjustments. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and pay her £200.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of a child protection case about her children. In particular, she says:
1. There were inaccuracies in the Council’s social work reports
2. The Council provided minutes of child protection meetings late
3. The Council failed to carry out agreed actions in the child protection plan, in particular ‘wishes and feelings’ work with the children
4. The Council said she was ‘unwell’, then refused to consider medical information – including evidence from her doctor – which said otherwise
5. The Council discriminated against her by failing to consider her disability when communicating with her and failing to make reasonable adjustments
6. The Council delayed referring her to an advocate
2. As a result, Miss X says she has been unable to work effectively with the Council to support her children.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. Miss X also complains about how the Council has acted in relation to facilitating contact with her youngest child. This is the subject of ongoing private family law proceedings and so it outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Therefore, I have not investigated this part of the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. 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

7. I spoke to Miss X and her advocate about the complaint.
8. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
9. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
10. 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

Child protection

11. Anyone who is concerned that a child is suffering or is at risk of harm should inform the Council. If the Council has reasonable cause to suspect the child is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm it must make enquiries to decide whether to take action protect the child or promote her welfare. (Children Act 1974, section 47(1))
12. Following a referral, the Council must decide within one working day whether it is going to begin an investigation. Before starting an investigation, the Council must hold a strategy discussion with the Police to decide what action to take.
13. If the Council decides to conduct an investigation, it must complete an assessment within 45 working days. The assessment will help the Council decide whether the child and family need help to keep the child safe.
14. If, after the investigation, the Council decides a child is suffering or at risk of harm, it must convene an Initial Child Protection Conference. (Working Together to Safeguard Children, 2018)

Reasonable adjustments

15. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body that carries out a public function. Its aim is that, as far as reasonably possible, people who have disabilities should have the same standard of service as non-disabled people.
16. Service providers have to consider removing or preventing obstacles to people with disabilities accessing their service. If the adjustments are reasonable, they must make them.
17. The duty is ‘anticipatory’. This means service providers cannot wait until a disabled person wants to use their services, but must think in advance about what disabled people with a range of impairments might reasonably need.
18. Only a court can find that there has been a breach of the Equality Act. However, the Ombudsman can find a Council is at fault if it fails to have due regard to its legal duties under equalities legislation.

My findings

19. Miss X’s case concerns children and vulnerable adults. To protect their identities, I have included only those details necessary to the complaint.
20. I will deal with each of Miss X’s complaints in turn.

There were inaccuracies in social work reports

21. In June 2020, the Council became involved with Miss X and her children due to concerns about her mental health and domestic violence in the home. In July 2020, a social worker visited Miss X to begin an assessment. Following a relationship breakdown, the Council was concerned about Miss X’s ability to care for her children and began a child protection investigation.
22. Miss X says there are errors in the assessments and reports the Council produced about her family. She feels the reports contain unsupported opinions and are biased against her.
23. The factual errors Miss X identifies are minor, such as the names of her children being confused. I recognise these errors add to Miss X’s perception that the reports are inaccurate and undermine her confidence in the Council’s service. However, I do not consider that the injustice arising from these errors requires a remedy.
24. The nature of child protection means that it will be distressing for all concerned. When conducting assessments and writing reports, social workers draw on training and experience to reach informed opinions. These are a matter of professional judgement. The Ombudsman will not usually question the merits of such judgements unless there is fault in how they were reached.
25. In this case, there is no evidence the Council failed to follow the requirements of section 47 in assessing Miss X, the children, and the wider family. I therefore find no fault in the Council’s assessment and reports.

The Council provided minutes of meetings late

26. Miss X says she didn’t get the minutes of a Review Child Protection Conference held on 20 November 2020 until the following January.
27. The Council says it posted these to Miss X on 25 November. On balance, I find it likely the Council did send out the minutes. It is not fault by the Council if Miss X did not receive them.

Delay completing actions in Child Protection Plans

28. In August 2020, the Council decided to put Miss X’s children on Child Protection Plans following an Initial Child Protection Conference.
29. The Plan included an action for the Council to start ‘wishes and feelings’ work with the children within three weeks. Miss X complains this work did not start until January 2021.
30. The Council says it did not begin this work in the timescale because Miss X withdrew her consent for the Social Worker to visit the children on 25 September. The records show Miss X restated this in several emails to the Council.
31. In November, the children’s father raised concerns about this work not being completed. The Council considered it in the children’s best interests to begin this work without Miss X’s consent.
32. There was a pause over the Christmas and New Year period. In January 2021, Miss X agreed that the Council could do direct work with the children in her home. This was on the condition that Miss X was also present. The Council facilitated this.
33. In her emails to the Council, Miss X is clear that she does not want the social worker to meet with the children. She does say that she wants the work to go ahead but only with a different social worker. It is for the Council to decide how to use its resources to meet its duties and obligations. The Ombudsman will not usually question such decisions unless they are affected by fault. In this case, the Council had to consider the impact on both Miss X’s children and other users of its service of another worker becoming involved in the case. There is no fault in its decision not to agree to Miss X’s request for a different worker.
34. There was delay of about two months in the Council starting the wishes and feelings work with the children. However, in the circumstances, where the Council was trying to work constructively with all the parents involved, I do not consider this to be fault.

The Council ignored evidence of improved mental health

35. Miss X says the Council’s initial assessment concludes that she is “unwell”. She says that it maintained this view even after she provided medical evidence of how her health had improved.
36. The Council must assess risk to children considering all information available. This includes medical information but also includes the Council’s own observations and information from other sources, including the police and schools.
37. The minutes of the Core Group meetings show the Council recorded Miss X’s assertion that her mental health had improved, along with the information in two letters from her GP.
38. There is no evidence the Council failed to take this into account when assessing the risk to Miss X’s children. Therefore, there is no fault by the Council.

Reasonable adjustments

39. Miss X’s mental health condition can be a disability under the terms of the Equality Act. Miss X complains the Council did not ask her whether she needed any reasonable adjustments, despite being aware of her disability.
40. She says had the Council asked at the start, she would have explained that her disability means that she finds communication difficult and would benefit from additional time and support.
41. The Council agreed that Miss X’s father could be present to support her at any meetings. Although not explicitly recorded as such, this was a reasonable adjustment to help Miss X engage with the process.
42. In her communication with the Council, Miss X reminds it several times that she has a disability. In my view, this should have prompted the Council to ask Miss X if she needed any other reasonable adjustments. It would then have been for the Council to decide whether any adjustments Miss X asked for were reasonable. In the circumstances, I consider the failure to ask Miss X if she needed any reasonable adjustments was fault.
43. The records show that Miss X’s communication with the Council was difficult for both parties. Miss X sent a large volume of emails and text messages which raise the same concerns. The Council was unable to respond to every one of these contacts, which increased Miss X's sense that her concerns were being ignored.
44. This may well have been the case whether or not the Council had asked Miss X about reasonable adjustments. However, it may also have reassured Miss X that the Council understood the impact of her disability. This uncertainty is an injustice to Miss X.
45. Despite not upholding Miss X’s complaint, the Council agreed in its complaint response to provide training to its staff on Miss X’s condition. Miss X says this has not happened. The Council’s response to my enquiries confirms that a Clinical Psychologist provided a training session to the social work team.
46. The Council’s social work assessment framework sets out guidance for staff on completing assessments. It sets out values which include:
• “Individuality, difference, and diversity are valued and celebrated.
• Equality of opportunity and anti-discriminatory practice are actively promoted.”
47. Appropriately, the framework is child-centred in its guidance. However, it does not anywhere explicitly remind staff to consider whether reasonable adjustments may be needed, by either the child or any relevant adults, as part of the assessment.
48. Nor does the assessment document itself include such a question. This is not required in order for the Council to have due regard to its duty to make reasonable adjustments. Including it, however, would demonstrate to users of the service, like Miss X, that the Council is committed to the values in its framework.

Delay in providing an advocate

49. Miss X complains the Council delayed referring her to the advocacy service.
50. The Council says it asked Miss X in July 2020 when it first visited to begin its assessment if she wanted an advocate and she declined this. The Council’s contemporaneous records do not confirm this, but on balance I think it is likely it did. The Council may wish to update the information it provides to parents and carers at the start of the assessment process to include information about advocacy.
51. In August, Miss X contacted the Council’s duty social worker by phone. Following this conversation, the Council emailed Miss X to say it thought she might benefit from an advocate and offered to refer her to this service. Miss X responded to say she had already referred herself.
52. The advocacy service allocated an advocate in October. This delay is with the advocacy service and is not the fault of the Council.

Back to top

Agreed action

53. To remedy the injustice to Miss X from the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Miss X in writing
• Pay Miss X £200 in recognition of her uncertainty
54. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
55. The Council should also consider how best to ensure all staff have regard to the Council’s duty to make reasonable adjustments. This might include:
• a prompt or question in the assessment template about disability and reasonable adjustments
• information in the assessment guidance to parents and carers about reasonable adjustments or advocacy
56. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

57. I have completed my investigation. There is some fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman