Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her case when she reported concerns about her son’s wellbeing at school to the Local Authority Designated Officer. Miss X says the Council’s actions caused her considerable avoidable distress. We found some fault by the Council and the Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy to Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her case when she reported concerns about her son’s wellbeing at school to the Local Authority Designated Officer. She says the Council did not carry out an effective investigation regarding her concerns and did not tell her the outcome of its investigation. She would like the Council to consider the evidence available to it as part of its investigations and for it to ensure it follows the correct relevant procedures.
2. Miss X also complained about the actions of her son’s school after she reported concerns to it about her son’s wellbeing.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)
5. 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)
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share our final decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated the complaints referred to in paragraph one. I have not investigated the complaint referred to in paragraph two as this relates to the internal management of a school.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered the information she provided.
9. I made enquiries to the Council and considered the information it provided.
10. Miss X and the Council have had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Allegations against persons who work with children

11. In August 2018 the government introduced statutory guidance, ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children’. The guidance provides a framework for organisations and agencies working with children and families to have clear policies for dealing with allegations against people who work with children. An allegation may be about a person who works with children who has:
• Behaved in a way that has or may have harmed a child.
• Possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child.
• Behaved towards a child or children in a way that suggests they may pose a risk of harm to children.
• Behaved or may have behaved in a way that indicates they may be unsuitable to work with children.
12. Statutory guidance for schools and colleges, ‘Keeping children safe in education’ sets out what school and college staff should know and do as part of the wider safeguarding system for children. The guidance says schools and colleges should have their own procedures for dealing with safeguarding concerns or allegations against those working in or on behalf of schools. The guidance says there are two levels of concern and allegations:
• Concerns/allegations that may meet the harm threshold.
• Concerns/allegations that do not meet the harm threshold. The guidance refers to this as ‘low-level concerns’.
13. The Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) is a person responsible for managing and overseeing investigations into allegations that somebody who works with children has behaved in a way that may pose a risk to children.

The Council’s procedures

14. The Council is a member of a partnership established to oversee multi-agency safeguarding arrangements in the area. The partnership’s procedure, ‘Allegations Against Persons who Work with Children’ (the procedure), includes details of the LADO service process and its role.
15. The procedure says the role of the LADO service includes the management of the overall allegations process, including receiving reports and maintaining accurate records of allegations. The procedure says the LADO service should keep comprehensive records to ensure that each case is dealt with speedily and efficiently.
16. The procedure says all concerns reported to the LADO service should be assessed to decide if the threshold for an allegation is met. In cases where this is not clear, the procedure says it might be necessary to have a discussion (by telephone or in a meeting) to evaluate whether the threshold is met. The employer and the LADO service should discuss the incident and agree whether it meets the threshold for risk of harm or not.

Principles of good administrative practice

17. In 2018 the Ombudsman published a guidance document setting out the standards we expect from bodies in jurisdiction “Principles of Good Administrative Practice”. This includes:
• Stating the criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions.
• Keeping proper and appropriate records.
• Explaining clearly the rationale for decisions and recording them.

What happened

18. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
19. Miss X says her son, Child A, has special needs and is non-verbal. Miss X contacted Child A’s school and said she was concerned that Child A appeared to be scared and showed visible signs of distress when he saw a specific teaching assistant. Miss X said because Child A is non-verbal, he was unable to voice his concerns. Miss X says the school did not appropriately investigate her concerns.
20. Following her initial contact with the school, Miss X contacted the Council in May 2023 regarding her concerns. The Council referred Miss X’s concerns to the LADO service.
21. In July 2023, Miss X attended a meeting with the school to discuss her concerns, including those regarding the teaching assistant. Miss X said the school had dismissed her concerns about the teaching assistant and said she was keeping Child A at home. The school said it had received a call from the LADO service in May 2023, but the LADO service was no longer involved, and the matter was not a safeguarding issue. The school said it had observed the staff who worked with Child A, including the teaching assistant, and said it had not observed Child A to be distressed around them.
22. Miss X emailed the Council in July 2023. She said despite the signs of distress shown by Child A, her concerns were met with indifference by the school and were not properly investigated. Miss X also said the Council’s lack of response to her initial report in May caused her great concern. Miss X asked the Council to investigate and ensure the relevant procedures had been followed.

Miss X’s complaint

23. Miss X complained to the Council on 8 August 2023. She said the Council’s response to the concerns she raised was inadequate and asked the Council to review how those concerns were handled.
24. The Council provided its complaint response on 16 August 2023. It explained the role of the LADO service and said on receipt of Miss X’s concerns, the LADO service appropriately contacted the school to understand their response. The Council said the LADO service’s view was the school had undertaken a robust investigation and there was no evidence of any ongoing concerns. The Council said it considered the LADO service’s response was proportionate, but it apologised for not providing its findings directly to Miss X.
25. Miss X escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaint procedure as she considered the Council had not fully addressed all her concerns.
26. The Council replied on 31 August 2023 and said it was satisfied the LADO service appropriately considered Miss X’s worries. It said there was no evidence of any ongoing concerns and the LADO service’s response was proportionate and in line with expected practice. The Council repeated its apology for not feeding back directly to Miss X; it said as Child A’s parent and as the person who raised the concerns, the Council should have contacted her to provide feedback.
27. Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

28. The Council says the LADO service does not investigate concerns themselves but manages the overall allegations process. It says Child A’s school took appropriate actions and made appropriate enquiries by observing Miss X’s son with the teaching assistant, and with other staff. It says the school observed no difference in responses. It says the school also checked any other worries regarding the teaching assistant with other children and with Miss X’s son. The Council says the concerns raised did not meet the threshold for police or social care to investigate further. It says the LADO service’s view was the school managed this concern within the remit of a ‘low level concern’ as per government guidance.
29. The LADO service’s role was to manage the overall allegations process and provide advice to the employer, in this case, the school. Records show the LADO service liaised with the school regarding the allegation via a telephone call.
30. The LADO service liaised with the school and satisfied itself the school carried out a robust investigation, and that there was no evidence of any harm to, or safeguarding concern regarding Child A. This is in line with the procedures referred to in paragraph 16. The Council is therefore not at fault regarding this aspect of the complaint.

The Council’s records

31. In response to our enquiries, the Council provided details of the discussion between the LADO service and the school in May 2023. These specific details provide comprehensive information to demonstrate the Council’s rationale for why the LADO service considered the school had carried out a robust investigation, and why it considered the matter was not a safeguarding issue. This is a decision the LADO service was entitled to make based on the information available to it at the time.
32. However, these specific details are not included in the Council’s records from the time of the discussion with the school and the LADO service’s subsequent decision. The Council’s records from that time simply state the LADO service discussed the concerns with the school, considered the school had carried out a robust internal investigation which did not identify any negative reactions by Child A, and that there was no evidence of any ongoing concerns. Whilst I acknowledge this information is recorded, the specific, comprehensive details provided by the Council in response to our enquiries is not recorded in the Council’s records from the time.
33. The Council’s records from May 2023 are therefore not in line with its procedure which states the LADO service should keep and maintain comprehensive, accurate records. The Council’s records are also not in line with the principles of good administrative practice which states we expect bodies in jurisdiction to keep proper and appropriate records. On this basis, the Council is at fault regarding this aspect of the complaint.

The Council’s communication with Miss X

34. Miss X complained the Council did not notify her of the outcome of the LADO service’s involvement following the concerns she raised in May 2023. She says the school told her in a meeting in July 2023 there was not enough evidence to escalate her concerns further and that the LADO service was no longer involved.
35. The Council acknowledged in its complaint response that it should have contacted Miss X to feed back its views and the actions it had taken. The Council says it did not contact Miss X because the school had already discussed her concerns with her and provided feedback about its enquiries. However, it acknowledges Miss X should have received contact from the LADO service.
36. Miss X says the Council’s actions have caused her avoidable distress and worry. The Council says it understands Miss X was concerned about Child A and acknowledges the lack of contact from the LADO service was likely to have increased her worries and reduced her trust in the authority.
37. I agree with the Council’s comments and find the lack of an update to Miss X is fault. It is positive the Council has itself identified it should have provided an update to Miss X and I acknowledge it has already provided an apology for this. However, this does not fully address the injustice to Miss X caused by the fault identified. The following section of the decision statement sets out further actions to be taken by the Council.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. To address the injustice to Miss X, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide a further apology to Miss X in recognition of the lack of comprehensive records. This is because such records could have potentially mitigated some of Miss X’s worries about how the Council handled the concerns she raised;
2. Provide a symbolic payment of £150 in recognition of the distress and reduced trust in the Council;
3. Remind staff to adhere to the Council’s procedures and the principles of good administrative practice, specifically to maintain comprehensive, accurate records relating to LADO service decisions, and
4. Remind staff that where referrals to the LADO service are made by parents, to ensure it provides appropriate outcome notifications where required.
39. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have found fault by the Council and the Council has agreed to take the above action. I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman