Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to have a child protection plan. It is unlikely we would obtain more of a remedy than the explanation given by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, says the Council should not have a child protection plan for his child, B.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council’s replies to his complaints.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council held a child protection conference in August 2022, for Mr X’s child, B. The conference recommended the Council had a child protection plan. It agreed.
6. A council calls a Child Protection Conference if, following a referral and an assessment by a social worker, a multi-agency strategy meeting decides concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm.
7. The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include recommending the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
8. 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. It also considers whether the Child Protection Plan should be maintained, amended, or discontinued.
9. The Council should hold a Review Child Protection Conferences within three months of the initial conference, and after that at maximum intervals of six months.
10. The Child Protection Conference is a multi-agency body and is not in itself a body in the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.
11. 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 right for a council to follow the recommendations of the Child Protection Conference unless there was good reason not to.
12. Mr X says he was muted during the August conference. The Council says this is true. It says Mr X had the chance to read out his written statement which the conference considered. It says Mr X chose to leave the conference early.
13. Mr X complained to the Council, and it considered his complaint within its child protection conference appeal process. In that process, the Council explained why Mr X had been muted and that a review conference was due soon.

Analysis

14. It is unlikely our investigation could achieve a difference outcome to the Council’s explanation given to his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we could achieve a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman