Summary: Mrs X complained the Council refused to reassess her as a foster carer when she returned after a break, having previously been a foster carer. The Council was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused to carry out an assessment when she reapplied after a break, having previously been a foster carer and resigned due to work pressures from COVID-19. She disputed she had been uncooperative or had failed to meet minimum fostering standards as the Council alleged. Mrs X said the Council decision caused her stress. She wanted the Council to retract its statement that she did not meet minimum fostering standards.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke to Mrs X about her complaint and considered the information she provided.
5. I considered the Council's comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided.
6. I considered the Council's policies and relevant law and guidance.
7. Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. We considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

8. Children who are looked after by a council may be placed in foster care. Foster care arrangements may be short or long term. Carers may also foster on an emergency basis or provide respite care.
9. Councils may only place children with approved foster carers. They usually have their own foster carers and may also use foster carers from private agencies. Councils may use a fostering panel to advise on decisions concerning approval, non-approval and deregistration of foster carers.
10. A foster carer may give written notice that they wish to resign from the role. Their registration as a foster carer is automatically terminated 28 days after receipt of the notice. The Council cannot decline a resignation.

What happened

11. In 2018 Mrs X and her partner Mr Y were approved as foster carers.
12. In late April 2019 the Council, Mrs X and Mr Y met to discuss their first looked after child’s placement (Child A). They discussed what worked well and the Council raised concerns that not all minimum fostering standards were being met. The Council suggested a time for reflection before the annual review.
13. The Council arranged four reflection meetings with Mrs X and Mr Y between the end of July and early October 2019. They discussed the concerns raised and the Council gave guidance about what actions Mrs X and Mr Y needed to take to meet the relevant standards.
14. In early September 2019 Mrs X complained to the Council about its report on their first year of fostering. Mrs X said the report did not contain accurate information, the reflection did not accurately represent their thoughts and overall the report was negative. Mrs X asked the Council for an independent review of the case. The Council responded the next day. It said:
• It was sorry they did not feel supported, and their views were not being heard; and
• Their views were important, and the reflection process allowed issues to be addressed. This process should continue.
15. Mrs X remained unhappy. The Council said Mrs X did not need to agree with its final report and the panel would look at all the information and Mrs X and Mr Y could ask the panel questions.
16. In late October 2019 the Council held Mrs X’s and Mr Y’s annual review. This was attended by Mrs X and Mr Y, their social worker and other relevant officers. The panel discussed what worked well and several concerns when Mrs X and Mr Y cared for Child A.
17. The panel said the following worked well:
• Child A’s basic needs were being met;
• Child A was in a loving home;
• Mrs X and Mr Y attended relevant training sessions above what is required of carers; and
• Positive feedback from the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) and Adoption Social Worker.
18. The panel also discussed concerns including:
• Training Standard 6: keeping children safe;
• Training Standard 2: team working;
• Training Standard 4: understanding the importance of effective communication with other organisations and social worker; and
• Mrs X and Mr Y said they had not been well supported in their first year of fostering.
19. The annual review concluded Mrs X and Mr Y met Child A’s basic needs and aspects of Child A’s placement were satisfactory, but some National Fostering Minimum Standards were not met. The panel decided Mrs X and Mr Y needed a review in six months, in April 2020.
20. In late March 2020 Mr Y contacted the Council. He said he had left the family home and he could no longer foster with Mrs X. In mid-April 2020 the Council contacted Mrs X and she confirmed Mr Y had left the family home and could not foster with her. Mrs X said she could offer short break or respite fostering but her main job did not currently allow for that due to the restrictions in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
21. The Council told Mrs X due to her change in circumstances she may need a reassessment as a single carer. A week later, it confirmed that if Mrs X wanted to offer respite foster care as a single carer it would need to carry out an in-depth assessment and its panel would need to approve the assessment. It said that, due to COVID-19 restrictions and her work commitments, it would put Mrs X’s foster care ‘on hold’ and would contact her in 6 weeks to check her situation.
22. In April 2020, Mrs X emailed to say she did not want to be reassessed as a single carer and resigned from fostering. A few days later Mrs X asked the Council to raise a grievance. Mrs X said she would go back to the panel but did not agree with the reassessment as she and Mr Y were still a couple. Council records show it was concerned over the mixed messages about Mrs X’s and Mr Y’s relationship status.
23. In mid-May 2020 Mrs Y emailed the Council again. She said she had reflected on her decision to resign from fostering and asked if her resignation was final. The Council told Mrs X she could not revoke her email resignation and asked her to complete a form to formalise the resignation. It confirmed that if she wanted to reapply to be a foster carer she would need to be reassessed and go back to panel.
24. Five days later Mrs X asked the Council how to reapply to be a single respite foster carer and the Council explained the assessment process, including the need for a reassessment and panel decision.
25. In early June 2020 Mrs X returned a completed form confirming her resignation and the Council’s Fostering Panel formally noted her resignation in early July 2020. At the same time Mrs X returned the resignation form, she sent a letter explaining why she had initially wanted to resign, including the pressures of COVID-19 and that she and Mr Y decided to live separately. She said she had not felt able to undertake a full reassessment at that stage but had now reflected on her decision and wished to reapply.
26. Following her request to reapply as a single, respite foster carer, the Council contacted Mrs X in July 2020 to clarify the type of fostering she could offer. Mrs X confirmed she would like to do respite care. The Council told her it had no need for respite carers at that time but it would defer her application for three months in case the situation changed. Although it kept this under review and contacted Mrs X about this from time to time, the situation did not change. As the Council did not need respite carers, it did not progress the application between July 2020 and November 2021.
27. In late November 2021, in anticipation of a further change of circumstances, Mrs X told the Council she would like to become a full-time foster carer. She said she wanted to reapply with Mr Y as a couple. The Council said it would let Mrs X know when the reassessment would start.
28. After further consideration, in late December 2021, the Council told Mrs X it would not carry out a reassessment because of concerns they had not been able to work collaboratively with professionals previously and concerns that elements of their care would not meet minimum fostering standards. Mrs X asked it to reconsider its decision.
29. The Council responded in early January 2022. The Council wrote a letter to Mrs X. It accepted the matter had been protracted, which could have been avoided, and apologised to Mrs X for the frustration caused. It said it had not considered the reassessment in detail until Mrs X asked about full-time fostering. It confirmed it would not carry out a reassessment because of concerns about whether Mrs X and Mr Y would meet minimum fostering standards.
30. Mrs X disputed she had not met minimum fostering standards and provided evidence to support her view. She asked the Council to retract all criticism and also to confirm it would cooperate fully with another fostering body she planned to apply to. In mid-January the Council confirmed it would deal with this as a formal complaint.
31. In its complaint response in early February 2022, the Council said:
• The outcome of the October 2019 foster carer annual review was that it decided closer monitoring was needed due to its concerns and the panel would reconsider the case in six months. The Council apologised if this was not clearly communicated;
• That at times Mrs X and Mr Y struggled to work collaboratively and constructively with other professionals which provoked confrontation. Its view was that they could not meet the fostering standard relating to working in partnership with professionals and the families of foster children;
• That a Council officer had suggested Mrs X pause before resigning because, under the fostering regulations, resignations cannot be retracted once sent; and
• It would respond to requests for information from other foster agencies as required by the foster regulations.
32. Two days later Mrs X emailed the Council to complain that an officer involved in the decision not to reassess had responded to her complaint.
33. In late February 2022, the Council accepted it was not appropriate for an officer involved in the decision to respond to the complaint, for which it apologised.
34. Another manager considered the case and decided not to accept an application to foster, on the grounds they did not consider Mrs X and Mr Y would meet the fostering standards in a new assessment. The Council confirmed this to Mrs X in March 2022.
35. Mrs X remained unhappy and in mid-May 2022 the Council sent Mrs X its final response. It said:
• It was not appropriate for the manager who had made the decision not to progress the application to also respond to the complaint. That part of the complaint should have been upheld;
• It was satisfied an independent review had been undertaken by the Council in March 2022, which agreed with the decision not to progress Mrs X’s application; and
• In future any complaint about decisions not to progress fostering applications would be made by an independent and more senior manager.
36. Mrs X remained unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to us. She said the Council focused on who replied to her complaint rather than the substance of the complaint.

My findings

37. I considered a considerable number of documents as part of this investigation. This included records that show the views of a range of professionals about the placement of Child A. The records show the Council sought views from Mrs X and Mr Y during that first placement, explained concerns it had and what action Mrs X and Mr Y needed to take to meet required fostering standards. The Council met with them a number of times to discuss its concerns with them and considered those concerns further at the annual review meeting.
38. In October 2020 the panel recorded concerns the couple were not able to work collaboratively with professionals and that not all minimum fostering standards were met. It made clear recommendations about closer monitoring and the need for a six month review by the panel. There was no fault in the decision-making process. The six month review should have taken place in April 2020 but didn’t because by then Mrs X had resigned as a foster carer.
39. When Mrs X told the Council her circumstances had changed in April 2020, it correctly advised her it would need to carry out a reassessment. Mrs X did not feel able to do that at the time and decided to resign. Her registration as a foster carer was automatically terminated 28 days later. There was no fault in the way the Council handled her resignation.
40. Less than a month after resigning, Mrs X said she had changed her mind. She was advised she would need to reapply. She said she wanted to do respite care. The Council did not actively consider the request to foster between July 2020 and November 2021 because it did not need respite carers. From time to time, the Council confirmed that position remained unchanged. This was appropriate.
41. Mrs X told the Council in November 2021 that she now wanted to foster on a full-time basis, although she did not make a formal application. The Council initially said it would need to carry out a reassessment, in line with its previous advice. After further consideration, it decided it would not carry out the reassessment. This decision was based on a review of the records from 2019 onwards and the concerns raised in that period by a number of professionals involved.
42. When Mrs X raised concerns about the decision, these were addressed, initially by a manager involved in the decision-making process. When Mrs X challenged this, another manager carried out a review but reached the same conclusions.
43. In making its decision not to carry out a reassessment, the Council took into account relevant information and it carried out a review after Mrs X challenged its decision. It explained its reasons for reaching its view. I have not found fault in the decision-making process and therefore cannot comment on the conclusion reached.
44. The Council accepted it was not appropriate for the initial complaint to be responded to by a manager involved in the decision complained about, which was not good practice. However, this failing was not sufficient to amount to fault. In any case, it did not cause significant injustice because a further review by a manager reached the same conclusion. The Council set out in its final response the steps it had taken to prevent this happening again.

Final decision

45. I have completed my investigation finding no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman