Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a future reduction in fostering payments to Mrs X. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council has told her her fostering payment will reduce by £75 per week in October 2023. She said this breaches the requirement of Fostering Standard 29.2 to provide clear information about financial allowances and expenses before a child is placed. She said the Council also incorrectly told Ofsted no foster carer would be paid less under the new arrangements it has introduced.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council restructured its fostering payments and allowances system in April 2022. It decided current foster carers would be paid on the existing system until October 2023.
6. We may find fault with a Council if it breaches its own policy, or if its actions or policies breach national statutory guidance. If a council changes a policy, we may also find fault if it fails to do so in an open way.
7. A breach of a policy is not the same as changing a policy. There is no evidence the Council reached the decision that will affect Mrs X outside its usual policy.
8. The national fostering standard concerning payments and allowances requires clarity from councils at the point of placement. But it does not require the permanence of those arrangements, or prevent a council changing its payments and allowances system. Mrs X has fostered the same child for several years. The Council could not be expected to tell her when the placement started what the payments and allowances would be five or 10 years later.
9. The Council’s final response to Mrs X’s complaint stated it had consulted with foster carers after taking legal advice about how best to do this. It stated it received an 80% response rate. It is clear elected members of the Council voted to make the change. Consultation is not the same as a veto. It was for elected members of the Council to decide if the responses received meant they should go ahead with the scheme proposed. As the Council consulted on the changes and elected members took the decision, we could not say the decision was not properly taken.
10. There may have been a difference between the Council reporting to Ofsted that no foster carer “will” be paid less under the new system and that no foster carer “need” be paid less. But that would not be a sufficient matter to allow us to find fault with a policy decision taken by elected members without procedural fault.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman