Summary: Mrs X complained the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) failed to fulfil their legal duty in respect of a substantiated safeguarding concern. She says this acts as a barrier for her to gain employment in the education sector. There is no evidence of fault in how the LADO carried out their duties in this case.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the LADO failed to fulfil their legal duty in respect of a substantiated safeguarding concern.
2. Mrs X says the substantiated safeguarding outcome will be reported to potential new employers and is an unfair barrier for her to gain employment in the education sector.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Allegations against people who work with children

7. Under the Children Act 1989, councils have a duty to safeguard children and promote their welfare. Under section 47 of this Act, if a child is suspected to be suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm a council must make enquiries to decide if any action needs to be taken to safeguard that child or promote that child’s welfare.

8. Councils must appoint a designated officer (LADO) to oversee investigations into allegations against people who work with children in their area. A referral must be made to the LADO within one working day in respect of all cases in which it is alleged that a person who works with children has:
• behaved in a way that has harmed, or may have harmed a child;
• possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child; or
• behaved towards a child or children in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to children.

9. The LADO is responsible for:
• Providing advice to employers.
• Managing and overseeing cases.
• Ensuring the child’s voice is heard and that they are safeguarded.
• Ensuring there is a consistent, fair and thorough process for all adults working with children and young people against whom an allegation is made.
• Monitoring the progress of cases to ensure they are dealt with as quickly as possible.

Key facts

10. Mrs X was working as a supply teacher at a special school when a member of staff made a safeguarding referral. The referral related to the way Mrs X physically moved a child who was displaying dysregulated behaviour. The report was made the same day as the incident occurred. Mrs X also provided a written account of the events on the day they took place.
11. The completed referral form was sent to the Council’s LADO. It was then the role of the LADO to determine whether the allegation met the threshold for further action. The LADO felt the allegation met the threshold as Mrs X had behaved in a way that has harmed a child or may have harmed a child. The LADO convened an initial evaluation meeting five days later. This was attended by a representative from the agency Mrs X worked for, the LADO, and two social workers.
12. The meeting determined that the teacher agency should proceed with an internal investigation. The representative from the agency would liaise with the headteacher of the school in respect of witness statements. It also said that Mrs X would be given the opportunity to provide her account of what happened and to explain any mitigating factors.
13. The agency representative carried out the investigation and produced a report two days later. The report defined the allegation as “inappropriate behaviour towards a child”. The report set out the facts in the case and provided information from Mrs X’s written statement and two witness statements. It also noted the investigator had kept in contact with Mrs X and further context was provided from Mrs X about why she had taken the action she did in respect of the child.
14. The report concluded that Mrs X would be offered training, that she would not return to the school, not offered further work until the training was completed and that any future references from Mrs X would state a substantiated safeguarding incident had taken place.
15. A further meeting was held 11 days after the incident attended by the LADO, the investigating officer, the headteacher and a social worker. They agreed the allegation was substantiated. Referrals were made to the Disclosure and Barring Service and Mrs X’s regulatory body. The documents I have seen state it was concluded that on the basis of two credible witnesses, the allegation was substantiated
16. A year later, Mrs X made a formal complaint to the Council about the LADO process. Her complaint was about the failure of the LADO to ensure a fair and thorough investigation was completed. Mrs X considered the outcome was wrong and that the LADO should review the case.
17. The Council reviewed the process and concluded the investigation was completed in a timely manner and the LADO process was undertaken with due diligence. It explained the role of the LADO is not to conduct investigations but to oversee and direct them. The decision regarding the outcome of an allegation is for the investigating agency. The LADO does not make the decision.
18. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

19. An allegation was made against Mrs X which resulted in a substantiated safeguarding decision. Such a decision can have consequences for the person’s career and employment. It is therefore understandable that Mrs X is unhappy with the outcome.
20. The Ombudsman does not make decision on behalf of councils or provide a route of appeal against their decisions. We cannot uphold a complaint simply because a person disagrees with a council’s decision.
21. In this case, Mrs X was working for a supply teacher agency and was not directly employed by a school or the council. A safeguarding referral was made by a school about Mrs X and this is when the LADO became involved. The LADO considered the information on the referral form and decided the threshold for further action had been met. This was that a person who works with children behaved in a way that has harmed, or may have harmed a child. I am satisfied this was a decision the LADO was entitled to take and there is no evidence of fault in the process leading to that decision.
22. I am satisfied the correct procedure was followed in this case. An initial meeting was held, followed by the investigation and then the concluding meeting. All done in 11 days and so without delay. The investigation report detailed the steps taken by the investigator and stated the reasons for substantiating the allegation. The investigator spoke to both Mrs X and the two witnesses. The LADO found no basis to fault the investigation or the conclusions reached. Again, I am satisfied this was a decision the LADO was entitled to take. Mrs X has not provided any evidence to persuade me there was fault by the LADO.
23. Mrs X says the initial meeting found that she should be given the opportunity to submit further information to explain her actions. Mrs X says the LADO never sought information directly from her and she considers this is fault. As explained, the LADO does not conduct the investigation and so it is not fault she did not directly contact Mrs X. The investigating officer spoke with Mrs X as part of the investigation and Mrs X submitted a further written statement directly to the investigating officer. I am therefore satisfied the requirement stated at the initial meeting to give Mrs X a further opportunity to provide information including mitigating comments has been completed.
24. Mrs X also says the LADO failed to take account of the fact teachers are able to use reasonable force to constrain pupils in certain circumstances. I have seen nothing to suggest it was ever alleged that Mrs X used unreasonable force. The issue was whether her actions harmed or may have harmed a child. The police were consulted and decided no further action was required on their behalf. I am therefore not persuaded there was any fault by the LADO in not pursuing the issue of whether Mrs X used reasonable force.
25. As stated above, I understand why Mrs X is unhappy the allegation was substantiated. However, the investigation was not completed by the Council or the LADO. The LADO role is to ensure the process was completed in a timely, fair and thorough manner to ensure the safeguarding of children. I have seen nothing to suggest any fault in the way the LADO carried out her duties in this case. The fact that Mrs X denies the allegations and her account of events differs from that of the two witnesses, is not evidence of fault by the LADO.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I will now complete my investigation as there is no evidence of fault in this case.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman