Summary: Ms B is a foster carer. She complains that the Council has not paid her the equivalent rate of pay as the previous foster carers for a child with complex needs. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council paid previous foster carers, who were employed through a private fostering agency, the specialist rate whereas she only received the advanced rate.

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 have discussed the complaint with Ms B. I have considered the documents that she and the Council have sent, the relevant policies and Ms B’s and the Council’s comments on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Council’s policy

5. The Council has written guidance on how it pays foster carers.
6. The Council splits foster carers into different categories and pays them different rates:
• Pre-accredited. New foster carers who become accredited by completing training.
• Accredited.
• Advanced. They care for children who have complex needs such as children with emotional and mental health needs requiring CAMHS intervention, children with challenging behaviour, disabilities or medical conditions. Advanced carers receive additional training and attend training events.
• Specialist. They care for the most challenging children, such as children with serious mental health disorders, persistent offending or severe physical or learning disabilities. Specialist foster carers must be available on a full-time basis to care for the child. Specialist carers receive additional training and attend training events.

What happened

7. Ms B is the long-term foster carer for child C. Sometimes she also provided respite care for child D, who is C’s brother.
8. D had been placed in mainstream foster placements since 2012, but he had multiple breakdowns of placements.
9. The Council’s Placement and Permanence Panel considered D’s placement in October 2015. The Panel considered two social worker’s reports and a CAMHS’ report about D’s needs. One social worker said D needed a specialist placement with one carer available at all times. She said the placement should be just for D without any other children. Another social worker requested an advanced foster placement with no other children in the home.
10. The Panel approved a change of status for D to ‘advanced’ foster placement.
11. After the Panel, the Council placed D with foster carers through a private fostering agency. He had two placements with agency foster carers.
12. D’s placement broke down on 29 August 2018. The Council asked Ms B whether she would accommodate D as his brother, C, was already placed with her. The Council said it would pay her the advanced rate. Ms B agreed to the placement.
13. Ms B complained to the Council on 12 November 2018. She said that she received £400 per week for the advanced placement of D. However, the agency paid D’s previous foster carers the specialist rate of £700 per week.
14. She said the difference between the levels of pay was unfair and she asked that the Council pay her the specialist rate for D.
15. The Council replied on 26 November 2018. It agreed that the agency paid £700 per week but said this reflected the agency’s different higher fees structure, not that D was assessed as requiring a specialist placement. It said his needs were at the advanced level.
16. Ms B was not satisfied with this response. She said:
• The Council was unable to find a suitable advanced placement with a Council foster carer which is why it placed D with an agency foster carer and gave him specialist status.
• When the agency foster placement broke down, there was no other advanced placement available for him and the only alternative would have been a placement in a children’s home which would not have met his needs and which would have been even more expensive.
• D wanted to stay with his brother.
• Even if the Council paid her the specialist rate, this would still be more cost effective than the agency rate of £700 per week or the cost of a children’s home of £2100 per week.
17. The Council replied on 17 January 2019. It acknowledged that the agency’s fee was higher but said that this did not relate to D’s needs, so it was not really a true comparison.
18. Ms B responded and said she did not expect the Council to pay her the same rate as a private fostering agency but would expect the Council’s specialist rate. She said the agency paid a specialist rate to D’s foster carer.
19. D’s placement with Ms B ended sometime in February 2019. The Council has said that D’s status has not changed to specialist since he left Ms B’s care. The Council has placed D with family members after the placement with Ms B.
20. I made some further enquiries from the fostering agency who organised D’s previous placement. I asked them about their fee structure and what the arrangements were for the payment of D’s foster carers.
21. The agency said it provided fostering services to different councils who all had their own different funding regimes. The agency therefore had its own funding structure.
22. The agency said it paid foster carers on a career structure. Progression on this structure was based on the foster carer’s experience and ability. The agency paid its foster carers a basic fee at five different levels from level 1 (£50 a night) to level 5 (£64.28 per night).
23. In addition, a council may pay an allowance on top of the basic fee because of the child’s higher level of support needs.
24. The agency said the Council’s referral for D said he needed an advanced foster placement and that D should be placed in a household with no other children or young people.
25. D’s foster carers received an additional allowance of £50 per night for D. This reflected the fact that D needed an advanced foster placement and the fact that the foster carers could only foster one child and therefore lost out on the income of a second placement.

Analysis

26. I understand Ms B’s concern at the difference in the rates of pay. However, I find no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. The Council considered D’s needs. Professionals carried out assessments of D’s needs and the Council based its decision on the assessments. The Council decided that D needed an advanced placement. The Ombudsman cannot question the merit of a decision if there is no fault in the way the decision was made.
27. The Agency has confirmed that the Council asked for an advanced, not a specialist placement for D and that was the basis of the placement. The agency’s higher rate reflected its different fee structure, the advanced status and the fact that the foster carers lost out on payment for another placement.
28. The Council placed D with Ms B on an advanced placement basis, which was the same as it did with the agency foster placement. Ms B’s situation was different as D’s brother was already placed with her. Therefore, the restriction that there should be no other children in the placement did not apply to her.
29. I agree that the Council saved a lot of money by placing D with Ms B rather than through the agency, particularly as the Council not only paid the fee for the foster carer but also the agency’s fee. However, the Council’s payment to Ms B is decided by its framework, not by comparison of the possible alternative costs.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have closed my investigation and have not found evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman