Summary: Mrs X complains about the actions of the Council’s designated officer for allegations who managed a safeguarding allegation made against her. Mrs X says this matter caused her mental distress and upset. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained:
1. the Council’s designated officer for allegations (DOFA) conducted an unnecessary investigation after receiving a safeguarding allegation made against her by her previous employer;
2. the minutes taken from a meeting which took place between her previous employer and the DOFA were not accurate or impartial;
3. the DOFA ignored her attempts to contact them; and
4. the Council did not give her right of appeal.
2. Mrs X said this matter caused her mental distress and upset.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
4. 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

5. I made enquiries of the Council and considered the information it provided. This included email correspondence shared between Mrs X and the Council, the Council’s allegations management policy and the minutes of the meeting.
6. I wrote to the Council and Mrs X with details of the draft decision. I considered Mrs X’s comments before I wrote the final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s DOFA

7. The purpose of the DOFA (designated officer for allegations) is to manage and oversee investigations into incidents where an allegation of abuse or harm has been made against a professional who has contact with children as part of their work.
8. Anyone can make an allegation to the DOFA if they have reason to believe an individual has behaved in a way that:
• has harmed or could be harmful to a child
• commits a criminal offence against or relating to a child
• indicates they may not be suitable to work with children
9. The DOFA will provide initial advice and guidance and liaise with the relevant regulatory body (e.g. OFSTED, police) as necessary.
10. The DOFA should then undertake an initial evaluation and decide on the next steps to take. If the DOFA establishes that the threshold of risk of significant harm has been met the DOFA should hold an allegations meeting within 5 days. The meetings’ purpose is to focus on safeguarding and promoting the welfare of the child. The DOFA may instruct the employer to undertake further enquiries or investigation.
11. Actions arising from an allegations meeting should be distributed within 1 hour of the meeting and the minutes should be sent to all parties within 5 days.

What happened

12. Mrs X worked in a teaching role for her previous employer until she resigned from the role in December 2020. Shortly after Mrs X’s resignation, the Council received a safeguarding referral from her previous employer alleging she had behaved inappropriately.
13. The Council held an initial evaluation meeting on 21 December 2020. The DOFA agreed the threshold for harm had been met. Mrs X’s employers began an investigation into the matter.
14. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 4 January 2021 to inform her the investigation was underway and told her the DOFA would not be able to discuss the case with her directly.
15. Following the investigation, Mrs X’s employers concluded an outcome of gross misconduct on Mrs X’s behalf. The DOFA determined the allegation was substantiated. Mrs X appealed her employer’s decision and the Council wrote to Mrs X on 26 January 2021 to advise it would place the decision on hold pending the outcome of the appeal.
16. Mrs X wrote to Council several times asking how to appeal its decision and formally complained to the Council on 29 January 2021. She said the DOFA failed to explain how she had met the harm threshold. She said the initial evaluation meeting was not conducted impartially and disregarded her views and evidence.
17. She also said the Council had provided inaccurate minutes of the meeting. She said the DOFA would not discuss the situation with her or return her calls. She disagreed with the DOFA’s decision to uphold the allegation as she said it was based on incorrect information provided by her previous employer. She expressed upset that the Council would refer the matter to her future employers.
18. The Council acknowledged Mrs X’s complaint on 4 February 2021 and told her the DOFA would respond by 1 March 2021.
19. The Council sent its stage 1 response on 15 March 2021. The Council said:
• Mrs X should refer unhappiness with her employer’s actions directly to her employer
• It had not received evidence from Mrs X showing her employer was dishonest
• It apologised for sending an incorrect cover letter when it sent her the minutes indicating it was upholding the decision when the decision was on hold
• The DOFA should have responded to Mrs X’s letters. The Council said Mrs X would receive an apology for his failure to do so
• The Council noted an inaccuracy in one of the paragraphs in the meetings
• There were no flaws in the process apart from this.
20. On 26 March 2021, the DOFA wrote to Mrs X to apologise for not responding to her emails. The DOFA also explained he could not be involved in the investigation but would pass on her concerns to her previous employer.
21. Mrs X escalated the complaint to Stage 2.
22. On 23 May 2021, the Council provided a stage 2 response. The Council explained it had spoken to the DOFA as part of the investigation. The investigator told Mrs X it was her former employer who made the decision to investigate and she should refer her unhappiness with the investigation to her former employer. The investigator noted there had been some administrative errors on the Council’s part and apologised for this.
23. Mrs X referred her complaint to the Ombudsman.
24. The Council finalised the notes from the meeting on 6 July 2021 after Mrs X’s appeal had concluded. The appeal found Mrs X had behaved inappropriately but her employers could have addressed the matter less severely.

Findings

25. The crux of Mrs X’s complaint is her unhappiness that the DOFA accepted the allegation made by Mrs X’s previous employer as valid and instructed it to investigate. The DOFA’s role is to oversee and manage investigations when an allegation of harm has been made regarding a child. The decision to investigate was made by Mrs X’s previous employer. The DOFA oversaw this investigation to ensure it was carried out correctly and suspended its decision until Mrs X had appealed the decision with her previous employer. These are reasonable actions for the DOFA to take. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of an action which has been carried out without fault. There is no fault on the Council’s part.
26. Mrs X has complained the Council did not accurately record the meeting minutes. The Council has conceded it sent an incorrect cover letter and recorded the minutes incorrectly. I have reviewed the administrative errors and I can see that they were minor and did not cause Mrs X a significant injustice. There is no fault on the part of the Council.
27. Mrs X has complained the DOFA failed to respond to her attempts to contact him. The Council has conceded the DOFA did not reply to Mrs X’s emails. I agree that it would have been best practice for the DOFA to acknowledge Mrs X’s request for an update. However, the DOFA had previously informed Mrs X it was an impartial body and could not discuss the case with her. I therefore do not consider the DOFA acted with fault. Following Mrs X’s complaint, the DOFA contacted Mrs X with an apology and further explanation of his role. This was a reasonable action for the DOFA to take. I therefore do not consider this part of the complaint to have caused Ms X significant injustice.
28. Mrs X has complained the Council failed to give her right of appeal. This is not the Council’s role. If Mrs X remains unhappy with this, it is up to her to refer her upset to her previous employer.

Back to top

Final decision

29. There was no fault in the Council’s actions. I have completed the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman