Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication with Miss B around the Initial Child Protection Conference process. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. It is also unlikely that an Ombudsman investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss B was subject to Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC) proceedings by the Council. A Social Worker had to complete a report for the ICPC which Miss B says was without her knowledge or involvement. Miss B also says that the Council did not adequately explain why an ICPC was taking place rather than a Child in Need meeting. Miss B wants the ICPC meeting minutes and Social Worker’s report removed from her file. She also wants a written apology for how this has been handled and the stress caused.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss B says that the Social Worker completed a report without her knowledge or involvement. The Council has said the Social Worker told Miss B that she must complete a report, and this was sent to her before the ICPC.
6. Miss B also says that the Council did not adequately explain why an ICPC was taking place rather than a Child in Need meeting. The Council has agreed it could have provided more information about the process. However, Miss B called the chairperson before the ICPC and had the chance to ask further questions about the process. So on balance, there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council carried out the ICPC process to justify further investigation.
7. Miss B would like a written apology and the report and meeting minutes removed from her file. The Council has agreed to write a letter recognising Miss B’s feelings in respect of the situation. It has also offered for Miss B to meet the Social Worker to discuss the report and any information that she feels is not reflected accurately. We cannot ask the Council to remove or alter Child Protection records. Miss B could ask the Council places a note on the file that lists faults or inaccuracies where records are in dispute. However, Miss B is not disputing the contents of the report and minutes. It is unlikely we could achieve more than the Council has already offered.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. It is also unlikely that an Ombudsman investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman