Summary: Ms C complained the Council failed to give accurate and truthful information in relation to a foster child who was placed in her care. She also says the Council delayed providing her with appropriate support during the placement. We find the Council was at fault as it failed to provide Ms C with all the relevant information before the foster placement began. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Ms C complained the Council failed to give accurate and truthful information in relation to a foster child who was placed in her care. She also the Council delayed providing her with appropriate support during the placement.
2. Ms C says the matter has caused her significant emotional distress and she now feels unable to continue as a foster carer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.
5. 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

6. I considered information from Ms C. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
7. Ms C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant guidance

8. The Fostering Services National Minimum Standards (2011) says foster carers have a right to full information about a child they foster. Information provided should be up to date and include any recent significant events, to help carers understand and predict the child’s needs and behaviours. Information provided should also be in clear and comprehensive written form.

What happened

9. Ms C is employed as a foster carer by a private fostering agency.
10. The Council decided a child it has parental responsibility for (D) was a suitable match for Ms C.
11. The Council provided Ms C with some information about D. This said she was a complex character, but she did not display significant challenging behaviour.
12. Ms C agreed to foster D in April. This was Ms C’s first fostering placement.
13. The Council reviewed the placement in May. It noted D was displaying some new and challenging behaviours.
14. The Council held a placement stability meeting the following month. This was to discuss Ms C’s concerns about the foster placement. Ms C said D’s needs had not been made clear to her. She said she was exhausted and there had been several challenging episodes. The Council agreed to explore respite for Ms C.
15. The Council arranged respite for Ms C to start in July. The respite carer pulled out, and the Council then arranged respite to start in August.
16. Ms C decided to hand in her notice and resign from being D’s foster carer.
17. The Council held a further placement stability meeting a few days later. Ms C explained an incident when D went missing with her granddaughter on holiday. She said she had to call the police. She also said she had reported 22 incidents of D attempting to hurt herself at school. She said she could not continue to care for D as it was not sustainable.
18. The Council continued to provide Ms C with respite until D moved to a new placement.
19. Ms C complained to the Council a few months later. She said it failed to provide accurate and truthful information before D was placed with her. She also said it delayed providing her with adequate support.
20. The Council responded and accepted the placement information record did not accurately reflect D’s needs. It said the information it provided was not comprehensive. It also said after the first placement stability meeting in June, she received weekly respite every Sunday. It said it provided one week respite from 11 to 18 August and 27 August to 6 September and then offered respite every weekend. It said it continued to pay her when D was on respite.
21. Ms C remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response. She said the weekly respite support from June fell through. She also said she asked for respite support in May but did not receive any until August which is when the placement had broken down.
22. The Council issued its final response to Ms C’s complaint. It said the fostering agency was going to provide weekly Sunday respite. It said there was some discussion about back up carers but none of the options were feasible. It said one week respite should have started in July, but it did not happen as the respite carer changed her mind at the last minute. The respite took place on 11 August. It therefore said it would partly uphold her complaint. It offered her £250 to acknowledge its errors.
23. Ms C remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and referred her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

24. The Council was at fault for failing to provide Ms C with all the relevant information about D’s needs before the foster placement started. I have read the placement information record and I find it lacks sufficient detail. It is clear D’s needs were complex and the Council should have ensured its records reflected this.
25. D was Ms C’s first foster placement. I find it more likely than not that if the Council’s records were comprehensive, Ms C would not have agreed to care for D. The evidence is clear D’s needs were too complex for Ms C to manage as a single first-time carer. She has explained the many incidents she experienced, including D running away and damaging her belongings. It is clear the placement has had a detrimental impact on Ms C and it was very challenging. This is a significant injustice.
26. With regards to the support that was provided, the Council agreed in a meeting in June to explore respite. The Council arranged for this to start in July. Unfortunately, the respite carer then pulled out, which was outside of the Council’s control. The Council then found alternative respite which started in August. The Council acted within a reasonable timescale and I therefore I do not uphold this part of Ms C’s complaint.
27. The Council offered Ms C £250 when it responded to her complaint. I do not consider this sufficiently reflects the injustice I have identified in this decision statement. A payment of £600 is more appropriate for Ms C’s upset and emotional distress. This is in line with our guidance on remedies. I also recommend the Council implements service improvements to prevent a recurrence of the fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

28. To address the injustice caused by fault, by 5 January 2023 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Ms C.
• Pay Ms C £600.

29. By 2 February 2023:

• Issue written reminders to relevant staff to ensure that prior to a fostering placement, all relevant information about a child is provided to a prospective foster carer.

Back to top

Final decision

30. There was fault by the Council, which caused Ms C an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman