Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s child protection action as it is unlikely we could significantly add to the Council’s replies to her complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s children services’ child protection investigation and decision to have a child protection plan.

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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; 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 Mrs X which included the Council’s replies to her.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background events

5. Following a police referral for domestic abuse in December 2023, the Council carried out a s47 child protection investigation. This ended in January 2024 with a decision to call a child protection conference. The Council held this in February 2024. It recommended the Council had a child protection plan. It decided to adopt that recommendation. The Council held further core group meetings and review child protection conferences. The children’s child protection plan ended in October as they were no longer in the country.
6. Mrs X says the Council’s social worker falsified information to get a child protection plan. She says a Council social worker interviewed her child at school without her consent. She says the Council failed to translate documents into her first language. She says the Council did not provide a translator at all the meetings. She did not like the child protection conference chair’s attitude.
7. The Council replied three times to Mrs X’s complaint. Its accepted documents were not translated. The was a translator at one meeting but Mrs X complained they were not good enough. Mrs X provided her own legal representation to one meeting. The Council says it had a duty to investigate the referrals and as Mrs X would not engage it had continuing concerns.

Analysis

8. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
9. Section 47 of the Act places a duty on agencies, but mainly the council and the police, to make “such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether to take action to safeguard or promote the welfare of a child in their area”.
10. If the information gathered under section 47 supports concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm the social worker will arrange an initial child protection conference (ICPC). The ICPC decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This might include making the child a ‘child in need’ (CiN) and implementing a safety plan.
11. The Council can speak to children without the parents’ consent in s47 enquiries.
12. The Council convenes a Child Protection Conference, if, following a referral and a social worker assessment, a multi-agency strategy meeting decides the concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm.
13. The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
14. The Child Protection Conference is a multi-agency body and is not in itself a body in the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.
15. 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 appropriate for a council to follow the recommendations of the Child Protection Conference unless there was good reason not to.
16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s replies to her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add significantly to the Council's replies to her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman