Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to safeguard Y, a child she provided with respite foster care. The Ombudsman finds the Council was not at fault. However, it has accepted it could have done more to reassure Miss X it had acted on her concerns and there were delays in its stage two response to her complaint. The Council should apologise to remedy any injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to safeguard Y, a child she provided with respite foster care. She said she Council did not listen to the concerns she raised, and she felt she had no other choice but to resign from fostering.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’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

4. I read the complaint provided to the Ombudsman by Miss X, her complaint to the Council and its response.
5. I considered the case records for Y, the Councils response to my enquiries and the supervision records for Miss X.
6. I referred to the Children Act 1989 and the Council’s procedures.
7. Miss X and the Council both had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Child in need

8. A child in need is defined in as a child who is unlikely to achieve or maintain a satisfactory level of health or development or their health or development will be impaired, without the provision of services; or a child who is disabled.

9. Councils can provide short breaks for a child in need without them becoming looked after. The Council uses respite foster carers to support it in delivering short breaks.
10. The Council allocates respite foster carers their own social worker. That person is responsible for overseeing their supervision, support and training needs. The Council’s policy says it provides foster carers with supervision every three months.

Child protection

11. The Council has a duty to investigate if they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. This duty comes under Section 47 of the Children Act
12. The government has issued guidance to Councils managing cases where there are concerns about a child’s safety or welfare.
13. The Council must have reasonable cause to suspect that a child is likely to suffer harm before it can enquire. The Council cannot investigate to see if there is a problem unless it has reasonable cause for suspicion.

The Council’s complaints procedure

14. The Council has a three stage complaints procedure. At stage one, the Council aims to sort out a complaint ‘quickly and informally’. It said that if a foster carer or young person, raises a concern, it shares the issue with the relevant care team for informal resolution.
15. At stage two, the Council investigates the complaint. That usually takes 20 working days. If it cannot complete the investigation in that time, it says it tells the complainant when they will get the response.
16. If, following the stage two response, the complainant is still unhappy they can ask for a review of their complaint by the Chief Executive. The Council aims to provides that response within 20 working days but says it may take longer if the case is complicated.

What happened

17. In 2016, Miss X became a respite foster carer for the Council. She began to provide weekend respite to Y. Y lived with her grandmother and brother.
18. In December 2017, Miss X contacted the Council. She said she had noticed changes in Y’s behaviour, and she was concerned that her grandmother was struggling to manage her brother’s behaviour. Miss X said she asked the Council for its complaints procedure but that it failed to send it. The case records demonstrate the Council acted on the information given by Miss X.
19. Miss X’s social worker, Officer A, held supervision with Miss X in February and she met with Y’s social worker in March 2018. The records show Miss X was concerned Y was displaying aggressive outbursts and she said that Y’s brother physically hurt her. Miss X said she felt Y would benefit from support with her emotional wellbeing. She also said she was frustrated on behalf of Y and was reconsidering her role as a foster carer.
20. Miss X sent an email of complaint to the Council in April 2018. She said that Y was becoming angrier and having more aggressive outbursts. She felt that psychological support would be beneficial. She said that she had raised these concerns over many months with Officer A. She said that Y’s social worker had agreed to do a home visit when Y was on respite, however had failed to attend.
21. Following that email the case records show the Council acted on the concerns Miss X raised.
22. Miss X had supervision with Officer A in May 2018. The notes show she was frustrated the Council had failed to respond to her complaint but that Y’s behaviour appeared to be improving.
23. The Council said it tried to informally resolve Miss X’s complaint by arranging a meeting with her. The earliest agreeable date was in August 2018. The Council said it explained to Miss X that there was no evidence of risk of harm, therefore, the Council was not able to take safeguarding action. Officer A confirmed that she had also discussed the issues raised with Miss X previously.
24. Miss X said she contacted the Council’s safeguarding team with her concerns after that meeting but it told her to speak to her social worker.
25. Later that month, Miss X contacted the Council’s Emergency Duty Team and reported that Y’s grandmother had told her Y’s brother had tried to suffocate her. The case records show the Council called Miss X back twice that night but there was no answer. It telephoned Y’s grandmother who reported the incident had happened earlier in the week, and that the children were asleep in bed.
26. Miss X said she contacted the Council the next day, who told her the Emergency Duty Team was for out of hours emergencies only and she should not have used that number. Miss X said she resigned as a foster carer that day.
27. The case records show that following Miss X’s safeguarding referral, the Council took appropriate safeguarding actions within the statutory time frames.
28. In January 2019, Miss X complained to the Ombudsman. However, Miss X’s complaint had not been through the Council’s complaints procedure.
29. On 5 February 2019, Miss X complained to the Council. She said the Council had failed to act on the concerns she had raised about Y. She said she wanted the Council to listen to complaints from foster carers. The Council acknowledged her complaint and said it would provide a response in 10 working days. It said it may take longer if the case was complex. On 4 March 2019, Miss X emailed the Council as she had not heard from it about her complaint.
30. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint on 5 April 2019. It partially upheld it. It said:
• It could not share any of Y’s personal information, but that it had acted on concerns raised by Miss X to Officer A. It accepted it could have done more to reassure Miss X that it had acted.
• It was sorry that a social worker had not visited Miss X while Y was on respite.
• She had taken the correct action in contacting the Emergency Duty Team, and that she had been given incorrect advice the following day.
31. Miss X responded to the Council saying she had seen no evidence that the Council had acted on her concerns. She said she had raised these in December 2017 but did not meet with the Council until August 2018. She said the Council said it could not take safeguarding action because Y was not a looked after child. She said the Council did not give her the complaints procedure when she asked for it in December 2017.
32. The Council’s final response said:
• Safeguarding procedures were in place for all children, not just looked after and if the Council had told her otherwise, that information was incorrect;
• It apologised for not providing the complaints procedure but said these were available online and within Council offices. It said it had reminded social workers to provide leaflets about complaints if a customer asked for them;
• It apologised if she felt unsupported as a respite foster carer.
33. The Council directed Miss X to the Ombudsman if she remained unhappy with the Councils response.

My findings

The Council’s response to Miss X’s concerns

34. The case records show that Miss X reported concerns in December 2017, March and April 2018. The case files show the Council considered and acted on those concerns. The Council continued to support Y as a child in need. The Council was not at fault.
35. Following the safeguarding alert raised by Miss X in August 2018, the case records show the Council took appropriate safeguarding action. The Council was not at fault.

How the Council dealt with Miss X’s complaint

36. Miss X complained the Council failed to give her the complaints procedure after she asked for it in December 2018. She then complained in April 2018 but did not meet with the Council until the August 2018. She believed that was the end of the Council’s complaints procedure until she came to the Ombudsman in January 2019.
37. Although the Council did not give Miss X the complaints procedure after she asked for it, I fall short of finding that fault. That was because the complaints procedure was available online, within Council offices and was in the foster carer’s handbook.
38. After Miss X made her complaint in April 2018, the Council did not meet with her until August 2018. The Council has said that was because of difficulties in finding a mutually agreeable time to meet. I cannot say whether that delay was the fault of the Council as the officer who arranged the meeting has since left. Therefore, the Council was not at fault.
39. Miss X met with the Council in August 2018. She said she told the Council she was unhappy with the outcome of that meeting, but the Council told her no more could be done. The Council said she did not contact it again until January 2019. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council for failing to escalate the complaint sooner.
40. In February 2019, Miss X did ask for the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two. It said it would send a response in ten working days. It sent its response eight weeks later. The Council did not tell Miss X about the delay. That delay and lack of communication with Miss X was fault and meant she had to chase the Council for a response.
41. Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage three. Its policy says that it aims to resolve those complaints within 20 working days. The Council responded in 27 working delays. That delay was not so significant to be considered fault.

The Council’s response to complaint

42. The Council partially upheld Miss X’s complaint and that it:
1. Should have done more to reassure Miss X that it had acted on her concerns and apologised.
2. Apologised if it had given her incorrect information about safeguarding and the emergency duty team.
3. Expected staff to provide the complaint’s procedure to customers when asked. It had reminded staff of the necessity to do this.
43. The Council has accepted some fault and apologised. That remedies any injustice caused.

Agreed action

44. Within one month of my final decision the Council has agreed to apologise for delays in responding to Miss X’s complaint at stage two.

Back to top

Final decision

45. The Council was not at fault in how it dealt with safeguarding concerns raised by Miss X. There was a delay in the Council’s stage two complaint response. The Council has agreed to my recommendations therefore I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman