Summary: Ms X complained the Council placed a foster child, Child Y with her without providing relevant information about Child Y’s needs and unreasonably removed Child Y from her care without notice. The Council was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council placed a foster child, Child Y with her without providing relevant information about Child Y’s needs and unreasonably removed the child from her care without notice. She said this caused her significant distress and financial loss.

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. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Ms X provided.
6. I considered the Council's comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided.
7. I considered the Council's policies and relevant law and guidance.
8. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

9. 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.
10. 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.

Looked after children

11. Councils are responsible for the safeguarding and wellbeing of all looked after children in their care. Every looked after child must have an Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO), a qualified and experienced social worker whose role is to oversee how well the council does its job as a corporate parent.
12. The Children Act 1989 guidance (the Guidance) says councils (usually the children’s social worker) should visit a child within one week of the start of the child’s foster placement and every six weeks after that.
13. Councils should not allow the placement of a child with a foster carer to continue if the placement is no longer meeting the needs of the child. If the Council believes the placement is negatively affecting the welfare of the child, it should end the placement.

Foster carers

14. The National Fostering Minimum Standards says foster carers should only be suggested as carers for a child if they can reasonably be expected to meet the child’s assessed needs. It also says foster carers should be made aware of all necessary information about the children to help the carer understand and anticipate the children’s behaviour in the placement.

What happened

15. Ms X was approved as a foster carer in early 2021. Between January and March 2021 Ms X attended fostering training sessions on a range of subject areas.
16. In late April 2021 Ms X started to foster Child Y through a private fostering agency, Company 1. Company 1, held a placement planning meeting. This was attended by Ms X, social workers and a family member of Ms X. The meeting record explained:
• Child Y’s placement with Ms X would be long term and she would have a full care order;
• Child Y did not have any severe medical condition and gave medical professional contact details;
• historical trauma Child Y suffered and explained how Ms X would manage the associated risks;
• contact arrangements for Child Y; and
• Child Y’s routine placement needs and school information.
17. At the start of Child Y’s placement, the Council emailed Company 1 detailed documents explaining Child Y’s needs. The Council said a social worker emailed these to Ms X. These included Child Y’s most recent looked after child report, Child Y’s care plan and most recent personal education plan (PEP) document. These documents included Child Y’s social care history and current issues explaining Child Y’s historical trauma and who Child Y could and could not be in a placement with. The Council said these documents were sent to a social worker in a secure format to stop a confidentiality breach. Ms X said she was not given any information about Child Y at the start of the placement and this was not provided until a year after Child Y’s placement started.
18. The day after Child Y was placed in Ms X’s care the Council said it emailed Ms X a matching report with an initial risk assessment that was shared with Ms X. It said Ms X was a first time carer but she had knowledge of fostering processes. It explained there were ongoing investigations about historical trauma Child Y disclosed and explained who Child Y could and could not be in a placement with to prevent possible harm by Child Y. The report concluded Ms X was experienced in the care of complex and traumatised children and would be a good match for Child Y in giving them a long-term placement.
19. In early May 2021 a carer supervision meeting with a social worker was held. These meetings were held on a monthly basis with a social worker, Ms X, Child Y and Ms X’s other family members on some occasions. These meetings allowed Ms X to discuss any concerns or queries she had about Child Y and her care.
20. Between early May and early September 2021 the Council said Ms X attended nine training sessions on a range of topics, some of which were related to the behaviours Child Y presented with.
21. Ms X said she was not made aware at the start of Child Y’s placement, they harmed animals, she said Child Y’s previous carers had raised this as an issue. In late May 2021 Ms X said on her foster care recording sheet ‘I sometimes worry with Child Y around animals’.
22. In late July 2021 Ms X said on her foster care recording sheet ‘Child Y keeps hurting animals’ and ‘Child Y needs to be kept occupied they have so much energy a pet would be great but we can’t get one while they continue to mistreat them’. In September 2021 Ms X said Child Y hurt several animals.
23. In late September 2021 a risk assessment and safer care plan was produced. This indicated Child Y’s key risks and the impact they would have on Child Y. The record notes Ms X was aware of Child Y’s risks and would monitor them.
24. Child Y’s looked after children review reports and supervision meetings showed between October and December 2021 Ms X said Child Y had a high level of needs but she was meeting their needs and no significant concerns were raised by the Council or Child Y.
25. Between January and March 2022 the Council made enquiries following a change with Ms X’s relationship and issues with her support network.
26. In early April 2022 Ms X became upset at the monthly care supervision meeting with the social worker. Ms X said she was concerned about Child Y being removed from her care because of other family members moving into the family home. The social worker said removal would not happen if all the checks were completed and did not identify any concerns.
27. In early April 2022 the Council records show Ms X missed a face to face contact with Child Y’s biological family. Ms X said she missed two contact sessions because the Council did not arrange a taxi for one visit and she missed another visit because of Council communication on visiting dates.
28. In mid-April 2022 Ms X told the Council two new family members would start to live with her from June 2022.
29. In late April 2022 a panel confirmed it was happy for Ms X to continue to be a foster carer, after making enquiries about the changes in the household.
30. In early May 2022 Ms X sent an email to the independent reviewing officer and Child Y’s social worker about behaviours Child Y had shown which were not previously known. Ms X said she had concern over her own stress levels. The Council said a few days later Ms X retracted the statement. Ms X said she only retracted one word in her statement.
31. Ms X told the Council she needed two weeks respite care whilst she was on holiday in mid-June 2022.
32. In early June 2022 a placement meeting took place. This was attended by a Company 1 manager, the Council and two social workers. The meeting minutes said:
• Ms X had experienced a significant change in circumstances;
• Ms X had two unapproved family members that will live in her property;
• Ms X had ignored Company 1 advice about the new family members;
• Ms X took the new family members to a contact session with Child Y’s biological family without them being checked;
• Ms X had missed contact sessions with Child Y’s biological family and concerns were raised about whether Ms X was prioritising Child Y’s needs;
• concerns were raised about the email Ms X sent in early May 2022 and the impact of her stress levels caused by Child Y;
• concerns had been raised by Child Y’s school; and
• a decision had been made to end Child Y’s placement with Ms X.
33. In mid-June 2022 Ms X went on holiday and Child Y went into respite care. Child Y did not return to Ms X’s care following the holiday.
34. Child Y’s and Ms X’s social workers told Ms X in a face to face meeting about removal of Child Y from her care. Ms X said the news was ‘a complete surprise’ and the social workers were laughing as they left the house which caused further distress. The Council said Ms X’s statement about the social workers laughing was ‘an untrue statement and it was dealt with sensitively and professionally due to the nature of the conversation. The social worker thought she had a good working relationship with Ms X and would not have wanted to upset her in any other way’. The Council case notes recorded Ms X disagreed with the decision to remove Child Y from her care.
35. In early July 2022 Ms X contacted the Council about Child Y’s removal and asked for a copy of the placement meeting minutes from June 2022. The Council gave Ms X a summary of the meeting.
36. In mid-July 2022 Ms X complained to the Council about the removal of Child Y from her care. She said the Council had broken its decision making principles, had not explained its concerns beforehand, had not considered Child Y’s feelings nor asked her views on Child Y’s removal.
37. In mid-August 2022 the Council sent Ms X its final response to her complaint. It accepted the sudden removal of Child Y from Ms X’s care caused her upset. It said it was not intentional but it had prioritised Child Y’s needs and welfare. The Council said because of safeguarding nature concerns it held a professionals only meeting which was in line with its policy. It confirmed Child Y would not be returned to Ms X’s care and said it had acted appropriately. The Council gave Ms X our contact details.
38. In early March 2023 Ms X remained unhappy and contacted us. Ms X also told us she had contacted Company 1 several times about returning Child Y’s personal belongings but they had not been collected nine months after they left.

Enquiries

39. In response to my enquiries about Child Y’s belongings the Council said Ms X initially refused to give back Child Y’s belongings because she hoped Child Y would be returned to her care but Child Y’s belongings had since been collected. Ms X disagreed and said most of Child Y’s belongings had not been collected.

My findings

40. I considered a considerable number of documents as part of this investigation. This included records that explained Child Y’s background before they were placed with Ms X and the historical trauma suffered.
41. Ms X said she was not told at the start of Child Y’s placement about Child Y’s needs and background information or given appropriate training. The Council records show a placement meeting took place between Ms X and Company 1 on the first day Child Y was placed in her care. The record from the meeting showed Child Y’s historical trauma and strategies for dealing with presenting behaviours were discussed.
42. The Council sent Company 1 detailed documents explaining Child Y’s needs. It said a social worker emailed these to Ms X by secure email, although Mrs X says she did not receive them. Although I cannot say which documents Mrs X received, Child Y’s needs were discussed with her at the initial meeting. On balance, I am satisfied the Council provided appropriate information at the outset and was not at fault.
43. The Council confirmed Ms X attended 16 fostering training sessions between early January and September 2021 which included training on a range of topics related to behaviour Child Y presented. A social worker also held monthly supervision meetings where help could have been given to Ms X on specific issues. On balance, the Council provided appropriate support and training.
44. Ms X logged several incidents when Child Y harmed animals during her placement. Ms X said she was not made aware Child Y harmed animals at the start of Child Y’s placement although Child Y’s previous carers had raised concerns. Child Y’s background documents did not include this issue and so there is no evidence the Council were aware of this before Child Y’s placement. The Council was not at fault.
45. The Council held a placement meeting in early June 2022. This was appropriate because it had a number of concerns, including about the impact on Child Y of various changes in Ms X’s life. In view of its concerns, it decided to end Child Y’s placement with Ms X. The Council’s primary duty was to safeguard Child Y and promote their wellbeing. It followed its process when making its decision and I cannot comment on the conclusion it reached.
46. Ms X said after the face to face meeting to end Child Y’s placement, the social workers laughed. The Council disputes this. There is a fundamental conflict of evidence, which I cannot resolve. So I cannot, even on the balance of probabilities, make a finding on what happened.
47. There is a dispute about whether all Child Y’s belongings were collected from Ms X, which I cannot resolve. However, the alleged delay in doing this has not caused Ms X a significant injustice to justify further investigation by us.

Back to top

Final decision

48. I have completed my investigation finding no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman