Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about children services actions. It is unlikely we would find fault which has caused the Council to have a child protection plan.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains about the Council’s children service’s decisions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)
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. We must consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
7. I considered Mrs X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

8. In May 2021, following a referral from a school, the Council started a family assessment on Mrs X’s family and two children. They were not attending school. Mrs X says they were being home educated. She says this was because of Covid -19.
9. The Council carried out an initial assessment and then a child protection investigation. This led to an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC) in July 2021. It decided to recommend the Council have a child protection plan. The Council held a review conference in October 2021.
10. Mrs X made two complaints to the Council. Mrs X said the Council’s assessment provided to the ICPC had been inaccurate. The Council agreed to place her comments with the assessment. In her second complaint she said the Council should not have started an assessment and there should be no child protection plan. She says the Council has not followed government guidance.
11. Mrs X says the School should not have made the referral. She says the School gave the Council inaccurate information.

Background law and guidance

12. Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, where a council has reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm, it has a duty to make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. Such enquiries should be initiated where there are concerns about abuse or neglect.
13. If, following a referral and an assessment by a social worker, a multi-agency strategy meeting decides the concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm, the Council convenes a Child Protection Conference.
14. The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
15. After the Initial Child Protection Conference, there will be one or more Review Child Protection Conferences to consider progress on action taken to safeguard the child and whether the Child Protection Plan should be maintained, amended, or discontinued.
16. Review Child Protection Conferences should be held within three months of the initial conference, and after that at maximum intervals of six months.
17. The Child Protection Conference is a multi-agency body and is not in itself a body in the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.
18. The Child Protection Conference plays an advisory role. But the final decision, for example whether to place a child on a Child Protection Plan or to discontinue a Plan, is the responsibility of the Council. We would generally consider it appropriate for a council to follow the recommendations of the Child Protection Conference unless there was good reason not to.

Analysis

19. We cannot investigate the School’s referral for the reasons set out in paragraph two.
20. It is unlikely our investigation could criticise the Council’s professional opinion it needed to undertake an assessment. The children were out of school and the Council was experiencing difficulties discussing this with the parents. Mrs X disputes this.
21. We would not criticise the Council’s decision to call an ICPC as it decided there should be a child protection plan.
22. The Council’s offer to place Mrs X’s comments on the assessment with it, is all that we would likely achieve for her complaint about mistakes in it.
23. The main injustice Mrs X claims from the procedural errors she alleges is the Council having a child protection plan. Ms X had the opportunity to be present at the ICPC and review conference and to provide her views in advance in writing. We are unlikely to say that any of the procedural errors she alleges caused the child protection plan. We could not change the conference’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

24. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault which has caused the injustice she alleges.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman