Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s management of a child protection matter involving his children. We did not investigate parts of the complaint because they are late and there are no good reasons to consider them now. In respect of the complaints we have considered, we found no fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that, during a child protection investigation concerning his children:
1. the social worker wrote a report in January 2021 which was factually incorrect and suggested he was a danger to his children; she only met him once before preparing the report and never saw him with his children; she failed to acknowledge what Mr X and his partner said about historical information or recent episodes and failed to consider a report prepared only a few weeks previously by her colleague;
2. social services told his partner that, if she did not move out of his house and away from the area, she would become subject to involvement causing her and her child to have to find new accommodation;
3. social workers were biased towards the children’s mother and failed to recognise that she had manipulated the children;
4. the child protection decisions were made by individuals who had never met Mr X or his children and were made during telephone conversations;
5. the final child protection decision was made during a telephone conversation and by individuals different to those involved originally; and
6. social services ended its involvement with the family leaving his son in a worse position than before their involvement began.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated complaints e and f. My reasons for not investigating the remainder of Mr X’s complaints are set out at the end of this statement.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)
5. 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)
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have considered:
• all the information provided by Mr X; and
• copies of the child protection plans and the minutes of the child protection conferences provided by the Council.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Child protection

9. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
10. Anyone who has concerns about a child’s welfare should make a referral to children’s social care and should do so immediately if there is a concern the child is suffering significant harm or is likely to do so.
11. The Council should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family, for example GP, schools and nurseries. The information gathering 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 child and family assessment); or
• a decision to convene a strategy meeting.
12. Section 47 of the Act places a duty on agencies, but mainly the council and the police, to make “such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether to take action to safeguard or promote the welfare of a child in their area”.
13. If the information gathered under section 47 supports concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm the social worker will arrange an initial child protection conference (ICPC). The ICPC decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This might include making the child a ‘child in need’ (CiN) and implementing a safety plan.
14. 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.
15. The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation that the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
16. 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.
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.

Section 7 reports

19. A section 7 report is often referred to as a welfare report. These are produced in private law child arrangement proceedings. A family court can order a council to provide a section 7 report. It will typically do so when the council’s children’s services team is already involved with the family in some way.

Key facts

20. Mr X and his wife separated several years ago. Their children have been subject to several child arrangements orders and shared residency orders. There has also been previous involvement with Children’s Social Care over the years.
21. In September 2020 the Council started an assessment following disclosures by Mr X’s son of physical chastisement by his mother. The assessment was completed in October 2020.
22. Mr X initiated private law proceedings in relation to his son. In December 2020 the Court ordered social services to prepare a section 7 report.
23. The section 7 report was completed in February 2021 and concluded that Mr X’s children were at risk of significant emotional harm so a strategy discussion was required to determine whether section 47 child protection enquiries were needed.
24. An initial child protection conference was held in March 2021. It was conducted remotely via a conference call in accordance with Government restrictions in response to COVID-19. The conference decided Mr X’s children were suffering from significant harm and they were placed on a child protection plan under the category of emotional abuse.
25. A review child protection conference was held in May 2021. This was also conducted remotely via conference call. Professionals decided the children should remain the subject of a child protection plan.
26. A further review child protection conference was held in November 2021. This was also held remotely. There was a unanimous decision that the children were no longer at risk of significant harm and the conference decided to end the child protection plan.
27. Mr X complained to the Council in June 2022. It declined to investigate his complaints because:
• the issues had already been considered during the child protection procedure and by the court during private law proceedings; and
• many of the issues dated back to January 2021 and it would not normally consider complaints made more than one year after the alleged injustice became known.

Analysis

The final review child protection conference was held by telephone call

28. The Council’s child protection conferences moved to virtual meetings because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This was in accordance with Government guidance which was that councils should consider using video or conference calling solutions to enable them to continue holding child protection conferences.
29. In April 2022 the Council decided to begin a gradual return to in-person child protection meetings with a view to all child protection conferences being held in person by June 2022.
30. The review child protection conference (RCPC) was held in November 2021 by conference call. There are no grounds to criticise this because, at that time, the Council was still holding all child protection conferences virtually. This was a matter for its discretion.
31. The record of the meeting shows it was held properly. At the beginning, the Chair highlighted the main issues from the previous RCPC and the social worker updated the conference. There were also updates from the children’s schools. The meeting was quorate and all attendees were given an opportunity to comment, including Mr X.

The decision to end the child protection plan was taken by different professionals than those who attended previous conferences.

32. The minutes of the initial child protection conference and those of the second RCPC show that the same person chaired the meeting. Some of the attendees were different. However, there are no grounds to criticise this. Social workers were present together with representatives of relevant agencies such as the children’s schools. There is no requirement for the same attendees to be present at each meeting.

The review child protection conference’s decision

33. Mr X says that, after social services decided to end its involvement, his son was in a worse position than before their involvement began.
34. The multi-agency child protection conference plays an advisory role. The final decision on whether to end the child protection plan was a matter for the Council. We generally consider councils should follow the recommendations of the child protection conference unless there is good reason not to. In this case, all professionals present at the meeting were satisfied the child protection plan should end. So, I find no grounds to criticise the Council’s decision to end the plan.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I do not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
36. I have completed my investigation on the basis that I am satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

37. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaint about the section 7 report prepared by the social worker. As section 7 reports are ordered by the court, their preparation and content are outside our jurisdiction. In any event, the report was prepared in February 2021 and so any complaint about this is late.
38. I have not investigated the remainder of Mr X’s complaints because they are late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider these issues now. The events in question took place in early 2021 and Mr X could have complained to us sooner if he was unhappy with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman