Summary: Miss X said the Council carried out a flawed child and family assessment which caused distress and worry. We found fault in how the Council carried out the assessment which caused Miss X injustice. To put matters right, the Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and add her views to the assessment report.

The complaint

1. Miss X said the Council carried out a flawed child and family assessment as it failed to seek her views, did not adequately engage with her child, and did not include the views of her representative. Miss X also said the assessment report contained factual errors.
2. Miss X said a meaningful and thorough assessment would have secured a positive outcome to support the family to stay together. Instead, moving her child to another home caused distress and worry about her child’s health and welfare.
3. Miss X wanted the Council to review and change the assessment, taking her, her child’s, and her representative’s views fully into account and correcting factual errors.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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 this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have:

• considered Miss X’s written complaint and supporting papers and tried to talk to Miss X about the complaint;
• asked for and considered the Council’s comments and supporting papers about the complaint;
• shared Council information with Miss X; and
• shared a draft of this statement with Miss X and the Council and considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

Child protection

8. Anyone who has concerns about a child’s welfare should make a referral to their council’s children’s social care team.
9. Councils must investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect a child in their area is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Section 47 of the Children Act 1989)
10. Councils should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family, for example, health visitors, doctors and schools. Gathering information helps the council 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; or
• a decision to call a strategy meeting.

Private fostering

11. A private fostering arrangement is made without involving a council. A child is privately fostered if someone other than a parent or close relative cares for them for 28 days or more.
12. Private foster carers are responsible for the day-to-day care of a child. Responsibility for safeguarding and promoting the welfare of the child remains with the parent.

What happened

13. Following an incident, the Council received a third-party referral about Miss X’s child, ‘C’. C is a ‘young person’, being between 14 and 18 years old.
14. The Council immediately started to consider the case and found, with police support, C had moved to a third party’s home. The Council arranged and held a strategy meeting and started to assess C’s needs.
15. In the month that followed, the Council contacted Miss X, Miss X’s representative, C, C’s school and health professionals involved with C’s medical care. The Council also contacted T, being the person C was living with.
16. The Council’s assessment noted the need for work to rebuild C’s relationship with Miss X. It also noted C’s repeated stated wish to continue living with T. The Council decided to provide Miss X with advice and information related to the incident. And, as T did not live in the Council’s area, to refer C’s case to T’s council (‘Council Two’) so it could carry out a private fostering assessment.
17. The Council wrote to Miss X about its decision and sent her a copy of the completed assessment. The Council’s letter said it had asked Council Two to support her and C to rebuild their relationship.
18. Miss X complained to the Council saying the assessment was inaccurate and inadequate. Miss X asked the Council to correct the assessment, seek more information, and include her views.
19. In response, the Council apologised for misspelling Miss X’s name throughout the assessment but said she should put her concerns to Council Two.

The Council’s comments to the Ombudsman

20. The Council accepted it should have dealt with Miss X’s complaint rather than direct her to Council Two. It could then have considered her assertions and, if necessary, changed the assessment. The Council said it now would apologise for not dealing correctly with Miss X’s complaint. And it would add a note of Miss X’s views to the assessment and share it with Council Two. The Council said it had already corrected errors in the assessment.
21. However, the Council said considering Miss X’s complaint about the assessment would not have affected the outcome. When it received the referral, C had already moved from Miss X’s home. That was a private family matter. C then chose not to return to Miss X’s home but to remain living with T. And, for C to remain living with T, Council Two needed to complete a private fostering assessment. It was not appropriate for it to work with Miss X or C now C was living in Council Two’s area. But it confirmed a Restorative Solution Team was supporting Miss X and C to rebuild their relationship.

Consideration

The failure to seek Miss X’s views

22. Miss X said the Council had not visited her or sought her views during the assessment. The Council referred to its case notes as showing contact with Miss X.
23. The evidence showed the Council contacted Miss X. However, the case notes did not suggest that contact had sought to gather Miss X’s views. The case notes also showed two proposed visits to Miss X had not taken place. Overall, I found the Council at fault in not adequately engaging with Miss X during the assessment. This would likely have caused Miss X distress. I found further fault by the Council in its refusal to consider Miss X’s complaint about the assessment. This put Miss X to avoidable time and trouble in then having to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Inadequate engagement with C

24. Miss X referred to C’s medical condition and questioned whether the Council had properly engaged with C during the assessment. The Council pointed to its visit to meet with C and a later telephone call.
25. The evidence showed the Council did engage with C. And C was clear and consistent in wanting to remain living with T. I saw no evidence to suggest the Council did not suitably and properly engage with C during the assessment. I found no fault here.

Omitting the views of Miss X’s representative

26. Miss X said the Council’s assessment did not include the views of her representative, including about an intervention programme to help keep her family together. The Council said the assessment referred to the intervention programme.
27. The evidence showed the Council contacted Miss X’s representative during the assessment. The assessment referred to the intervention programme and said working with Miss X and C to rebuild their relationship would make things better for C. And, when the Council wrote to Miss X with its assessment decision, it confirmed it had asked Council Two to support her and X in rebuilding their relationship. I was satisfied the Council took appropriate steps to engage with and include the views of Miss X’s representative during the assessment. I found no fault here.

Conclusion

28. I found fault in how the Council dealt with Miss X’s views during the assessment. However, the evidence clearly showed C had moved from Miss X’s home before the Council’s involvement with the family. The Council then found C wanted to live with T. The Council acted correctly in transferring the case to Council Two so it could carry out a private fostering assessment for C. Neither the faults identified at paragraph 23 nor Miss X’s other concerns would have affected the Council’s assessment decision. The Council had now made a suitable offer to put matters right.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. I found fault causing injustice (see paragraph 23). The Council’s offer to apologise to Miss X and add a note of her views to the assessment was an appropriate and reasonable way to put matters right. The Council therefore agreed, within 20 working days of this decision statement, to:

• write to Miss X to apologise for the avoidable distress, time and trouble she was put to because of its failures to:

- properly take account of her views during the assessment, and

- consider her complaint about the assessment; and

• to add a note to the assessment to reflect Miss X’s views and then share that assessment with Council Two.

30. We publish guidance on remedies, including about effective apologies. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology referred to at paragraph 29.
31. The Council should also send us evidence of its compliance with paragraph 29.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I completed my investigation, finding fault causing injustice, on the Council agreeing the recommendations at paragraph 29.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman