Summary: Mrs Y complained about some of her experiences as a foster carer. The Council upheld and partially upheld some of her complaints. We have investigated the areas of complaint which the Council did not uphold. We have also considered whether the remedies already offered by the Council are proportionate. The Council has agreed to make a further payment of £750 to Mrs Y in recognition of the uncertainty and distress cause by the fault. The Council will also provide evidence of some of the service improvements already agreed.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains about the poor provision of support and information by the Council during the fostering, SGO (Special Guardianship Order), and adoption processes. In particular, she says: 
1. The Council failed to communicate CCNs [Child Concern Notifications] with her and 'cherry picked' the information it shared. Mrs Y believes the Police shared her view that she was not supported by the Council.
2. The Council failed to properly consider her complaints around the failure to formally notify Mrs Y of the allegations made by the young person, F, and the outcome of internal meetings
3. The Council failed to support Mrs Y at key points during two of the placements.
4. The Council failed to act with urgency upon the CCN received for F and did not respond to Mrs Y’s requests for help. When the Council did respond, it failed to review D’s care plan and ensure appropriate safeguards were in place.
5. The Council did not ask Mrs Y to provide her account following allegations made by F. She says the SSW also disengaged. When she told the Council about F’s drug use, the Council failed to support her.
6. The NVR [Non-Violent Resistance] course Mrs Y attended encouraged foster carers to mimic the communication styles of the foster child. Mrs Y says she was reprimanded for copying F’s language. When she raised concerns about the NVR training course, the Council ignored her concerns.
7. The Council mishandled her complaint and failed to ensure there were no conflicts of interest during the complaint investigation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated the areas of complaint which were not upheld by the Council. I have not revisited the areas of complaint which the Council upheld because it would not be a good use of public funds to reinvestigate those issues. I have however considered the remedial action proposed by the Council to decide whether it is proportionate and in line with our Remedies Guidance.
6. I have exercised discretion to investigate what happened from October 2022 to June 2024. I have made this decision based on the significant delay in the Council’s complaint handling which prevented Mrs Y from complaining to us sooner. However, it is my view that Mrs Y could have complained sooner about anything which happened before October 2022.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mrs Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mrs Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
9. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Summary of key background events relevant to the complaints

10. This is a chronological summary of the key events which happened in the months leading up to Mrs Y’s complaint. This section is not intended to cover every event which happened in this period.
11. Between September 2018 and July 2023 Mrs Y and her husband were foster carers. Throughout this time Mrs Y cared for several young people. I will refer to the young people relevant to this complaint as D, E and F.
• D lived with Mrs Y between November 2018 and July 2023.
• E lived with Mrs Y between January 2022 and May 2022.
• F lived with Mrs Y between July 2022 and May 2023.
12. E’s placement ended in May 2022 after an attack against Mrs Y. Following this, Mrs Y served notice on the placement, and E was subject to an emergency removal.
13. Two months later, F moved in to live with Mrs Y. The records show that F was settled in the placement initially.
14. Mrs Y called the police on 25 April 2023 because D and F did not return home after school. The police located both children at a friend’s house and returned them back to Mrs Y. The records show a social worker completed a home visit later that day to see D and F.
15. On 10 May 2023 Mrs Y called the police again to report F as missing. She said he did not go to school after leaving the address. Mrs Y also called a social worker to notify them that F was missing.
16. Mrs Y reported F missing again on 12 May 2023 when he failed to return home. F was located after returning to school on 15 May 2023. He said he had stayed at a friend’s house and did not want to return to Mrs Y.
17. On 17 May 2023 Mrs Y and her husband provided 28 days’ notice of their intention to end the placement with F.
18. F returned to the placement on 22 May 2023 but said his intention was to run away again. Mrs Y discussed concerns with the supervising social worker (SSW) on 23 May 2023 about F repeatedly running away and their alleged drug use. Mrs Y expressed concerns that F’s actions created risk for the whole household.
19. Following some internal discussions, the Council decided to:
• Make a referral for F to see a therapist he previously worked with;
• Offer support to Mrs Y regarding ongoing work with F; and
• Complete searches to find potential placements for F.
20. Mrs Y called the police again on 25 May to report F as missing. The police located F at a friend’s house. F said they had been assaulted by another young person. An ambulance attended but F had no injuries and was returned to Mrs Y. On his return, the records show that Mrs Y and F exchanged some verbal insults.
21. F moved to another placement on 26 May 2023.
22. Four days later, the police received an allegation from F about harm caused by Mrs Y and her husband.
23. On 6 June 2023 Mrs Y provided written notice of her resignation from her role as foster carer. D remained in the care of Mrs Y until July 2023 when their placement ended.
24. Mrs Y formally complained to the Council on 6 October 2023. The Council responded on 20 March 2024.

Complaint a)

25. The records show the Council received several CCNs from the local police force in respect of Mrs Y’s foster children. I will summarise those CCNs below.
1. On 25 April 2023 regarding the failure of D and F to return home after school. The records show emails between the social worker and Mrs Y about the incident. The social worker also completed a home visit.
2. On 10 May 2023 after Mrs Y reported F to the police as missing. Mrs Y contacted the social worker to discuss the incident. The Council discussed a possible respite placement and made suggestions of how Mrs Y should respond when F returns home.
3. On 16 May 2023 regarding F going missing on 12 May and Mrs Y refusing to allow F to return home. The records show calls between Mrs Y and the social worker. The Council also arranged a strategy meeting to review the concerns. When the social worker did a home visit, Mrs Y expressed that she was not aware F had a history of going missing and felt the Council should have shared this with her. The Council held a ‘care team meeting’ on 17 May.
4. On 23 May 2023 regarding F going missing four times in the last month and a deterioration of their behaviour following a disclosure about drug use and shoplifting. The Council contacted Mrs Y by telephone the same day to discuss a ‘Return Home Interview’ (RHI).
5. On 24 May 2023 about an argument between Mrs Y and F and threats made by F to run away again due to him not “getting his own way”. The RHI took place later that day.
6. On 26 May 2023 after Mrs Y reported F as missing. He was later found at a friend’s house after being attacked by another young person. The police stated that Mrs Y used inappropriate language towards F when he returned home. The records show the social worker called Mrs Y to discuss the incident. F then moved to a new placement.
7. On 2 June 2023 regarding two reported crimes. One regarding an allegation that Mr Y pushed F in the chest causing him to stumble backwards down steps. Another regarding an allegation that Mrs Y pushed F onto his bed and struck him in the face with her finger.
26. The records show the Council discussed each CCN with Mrs Y soon after receipt and shared an appropriate amount of information. I do not find fault in this part of Mrs Y’s complaint.
27. There is no evidence the police shared Mrs Y’s view that she was unsupported. One of the CCNs noted: “she [Mrs Y] feels that she isn’t getting support from social services” and “understandably [Mrs Y] is angry and upset about the amount of times [F] has been reported missing she feels that she isn’t getting support from social services”. These quotes show the officers relayed Mrs Y’s concerns. There is no evidence to show that other professionals shared Mrs Y’s opinions about the Council.

Complaint b)

28. Following disclosures made by F, the Council made a referral to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) on 30 May 2023. The social worker called Mrs Y on 1 June 2023 to discuss the allegation. Mrs Y confirmed the language she used towards F.
29. The LADO then held an ‘allegation management’ meeting on 2 June 2023 during which the attendees considered the contents of an email sent by Mrs Y with her description of the incident.
30. Records show the Council wrote to Mrs Y on 6 June 2023 and called her to invite her to a ‘standards of care’ meeting to discuss concerns raised about the alleged verbal insults and physical assault against F.
31. Mrs Y declined to attend the meeting because she had already resigned as a foster carer. In another email, Mrs Y acknowledged the Council’s concerns about the language used towards F but denied the allegation of physical assault.
32. The Council partially upheld this complaint because it found that Mrs Y did not receive a formal letter to confirm the allegation and to offer Mrs Y independent support. The Council also found it had not provided Mrs Y with a summary of the allegations, how these were followed up and resolved and any actions or decisions taken. The Council noted that Mrs Y received support from the social worker but did not have support from the fostering service as expected.
33. However, the Council noted Mrs Y received telephone or email contact each day following the allegation. The Council verbally relayed details of the allegation and the investigation outcome on the fourth day.
34. In my view, the failure to provide the relevant details in writing to Mrs Y caused her some injustice. There was also a failure to formally offer independent support. However, in my view the injustice caused by the fault is not significant because the records show the Council provided the relevant details by other means. The Council should apologise to Mrs Y and make a symbolic payment in recognition of the distress caused by this fault.

Complaint d)

35. I will not revisit Mrs Y’s complaints about the CCNs as I have dealt with this matter under complaint a). Instead, I have focussed on the complaint about how the Council kept D’s placement under review following the disruption involving F. I have also considered how the Council maintained communication with Mrs Y about D’s placement.
36. The records provided by the Council show the following times when it either considered or discussed D’s placement with Mrs Y:
• 14 April at a clinical case management meeting.
• 19 April at a care team meeting.
• 25 April during a home visit by the social worker to see D following a CCN.
• 2 May the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) considered D’s placement.
• 9 May a home visit to see F and D and to discuss the placement. Mrs Y said, “the children are all settled and doing well”.
• 17 May during a case discussion to consider D’s views and what was working well. The Council said, “placement is settled however there are occasions where there are issues and [D] has been verbally abusive to carer”.
• 22 May during a visit to D to transport him to a family funeral.
• 31 May the social worker called D to discuss the allegation made by F. D did not raise any concerns about Mrs Y.
• 13 June during a foster carer supervision visit to discuss D’s placement.
• 14 June during a care team meeting to discuss long-term plans for D.
• 21 June the social worker’s manager email to Mrs Y about some concerns raised by D about a change of social worker.
• 22 June during a home visit by the social worker to speak with D and to discuss the end of his placement.
37. Following concerns raised by F about physical harm caused by Mrs Y, the Council started safeguarding action, made a LADO referral and considered emergency care planning for D.
38. At the time of the allegation D was not in the placement because they were attending a camp. As shown above, the social worker spoke to D on 31 May who raised no concerns of their own. The Council decided there was no need to implement an emergency care plan.
39. One week later Mrs Y submitted her resignation.
40. The Council did not uphold this complaint but acknowledged, “it would have been helpful to visit [D] to check his wellbeing and continuing care in the short time following such significant events before his statutory visit…”
41. The Council also acknowledged in response to another part of Mrs Y’s complaint, “… there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate fostering services had been proactive in assessing the impact of [F’s] behaviours on all members of the household or made any recommendations on whether in their view [F’s] place should continue”.
42. As part of this investigation, I am not able to consider any injustice caused to D. I can only consider how any fault has affected Mrs Y.
43. In my view, although the Council maintained oversight of D’s placement, it could have been more proactive in assessing the emerging risks for all the young people involved. Although D made no disclosures of their own, and the Council did not decide it was necessary to implement emergency procedures, there is some uncertainty created by the lack of risk assessments. This is because we cannot say whether the Council would have taken different action to prevent the breakdown of the placements. The Council should apologise and make a symbolic payment in recognition of that uncertainty.

Complaint e)

44. Three days after F made an allegation to the police, the social worker called Mrs Y to relay the police’s decision to take no further action. Mrs Y gave her description of what happened. Mrs Y then followed up with a list of questions by email. On 6 June 2023 Mrs Y emailed a written account of the incident. It was in this email that Mrs Y also resigned as a foster carer.
45. The records show that Mrs Y was able to give her description of the incident just three days after F made their allegation. I therefore do not find fault in this part of Mrs Y’s complaint.
46. Mrs Y also says the Council failed to support her about F’s alleged drug use. The records show Mrs Y raised concerns on 23 May 2023. F moved out of the placement three days later. In my view, there was little scope for the Council to provide any meaningful support to Mrs Y in the short space of three days and any failure to do so would not likely cause Mrs Y a significant injustice. I do not find fault in this part of Mrs Y’s complaint.

Complaint f)

47. The Council commissioned training in NVR for some foster carers in 2022. The purpose of the training was to help manage their approach when caring for young people who have experienced trauma and display verbally or physically challenging behaviour.
48. During the course, some carers disagreed with the suggested approach. One example was regarding an adopted child who accessed extreme adult material. Some participants of the training provided feedback about their concerns.
49. Mrs Y raised her concerns about the course in an email dated 20 June 2022 to which she also attached her feedback form. The form said the course advised carers to do “…many things that are against the fostering standards”.
50. On 21 September 2022 records show the Council held a foster carer supervision with Mrs Y in which she raised concerns about the NVR course. The Council also had follow-up sessions and individual supervision with other affected foster carers. Following this, the Council decided to commission an alternative provider of training to support those caring for children who have experienced trauma.
51. In my view, the Council did not ignore Mrs Y’s concerns. It reviewed the training and took appropriate action to change the course provider. I therefore do not find fault in this part of complaint f).
52. Mrs Y also says the NVR training course was the reason why she used inappropriate language towards F after he went missing May 2023. The investigating officer who responded to Mrs Y’s complaint reviewed the training slides and said there were “… no references or recommendations promoting the use of a child’s language”. Irrespective of the contents of the training, it is my view that foster carers are expected to exercise their own judgement to manage their communication style and ensure it remains appropriate to the circumstances and the young person in question. There is no fault in this part of the complaint because the Council is not responsible for the exchanges between Mrs Y and F.

Complaint c)

53. Mrs Y complains that she felt unsupported by the Council during times when there were issues with the placements. She says the police shared her view; this is something I have considered in paragraph 27 of this statement.
54. To avoid repetition, I do not intend to re-visit all the key incidents involving the young people here as they have been covered in other parts of this statement. For the sake of chronology, I have put my findings for this point towards the end of the statement so that it is clear why Mrs Y felt unsupported.
55. As this statement sets out, although Mrs Y received some contact and support from the Council at times when Mrs Y reported F and D as missing, or made allegations about drug use, there were missed opportunities to consider any wider risks within the placement. There were also times when Mrs Y asked for respite. This would involve F going to another placement on a short-term basis. Although Mrs Y once arranged respite as a private arrangement, the Council took the view that all parties should try to maintain the placement as this was in the best interests of F.
56. In response to the complaint, the Council acknowledged that it should have sought a respite placement to “… create space for reflection, attempt some reconciliation [between Mrs Y and F] in order to maintain the placement”.
57. In my view, this fault caused Mrs Y injustice in the form of distress which the Council has agreed to apologise for and make a symbolic payment.

Complaint g)

58. In October 2023 the Council accepted Mrs Y’s complaint under its corporate complaints procedure, the policy for which says:
• At stage one, the relevant service should respond within 15 working days. However complex or serious complaints may need an extended timeframe which will be discussed with the complainant at the time.
• At stage two, “an appropriately appointed senior officer who has not been previously involved in your complaint will carry out the review”. The Council aims to respond within 20 working days.
59. When the Council provided an “adjudication response” following the initial complaint response, it acknowledged the investigation had not followed the usual complaints process. It said this was due to several reasons including a request from Mrs Y for “complete independence” and due to the “length and complexity” of the complaints raised. The Council apologised to Mrs Y for the time taken to investigate her complaint, which from start to finish was 28 weeks.
60. Mrs Y raised concerns about the impartiality of the person allocated to investigate and respond to her complaint. In response to this point, the Council said the investigating officer was commissioned by the Council and had a long history of social work. They were not a current or previous employee of the Council. I find no fault in the selection of the officer because they were not involved with Mrs Y’s case and therefore met the requirements of the corporate complaints policy.
61. The Council has already apologised to Mrs Y for the time taken to investigate her complaint and offered a payment of £200. In my view, this is a proportionate remedy and in line with our Remedies Guidance.

Actions agreed by the Council

62. The Council agreed to implement several service improvements following the investigation of Mrs Y’s complaints. It has provided a development plan with the status of each agreed action. Alongside each point I have included a short summary of the status of the action.
1. Apologise to Mrs Y for the findings of the investigation. The Council provided a written apology on 28 March 2024.
2. Remind managers that matching meetings and records to be completed and accurate records of all information discussed to be signed by the responsible manager. The Council has not commented on this point.
3. Consider developing a procedure to identify and allocate roles and channels of communication when fosters carers request to be considered in permanence plans. The Council confirms this action is complete. The relevant policy was reviewed and is now in place.
4. Ensure all referral forms are dated and signed. Consideration to be given to formally recording information shared between foster carers when a child moves placement. completed. The Council confirms it has reviewed and amended the referral forms which are now in use.
5. Review procedures for recording resource meetings to ensure all information and decision making is recorded in a way to demonstrate the matching decision. The Council says this is an ongoing piece of work, but improvements have been made.
6. Check the annual review report format for foster carers to ensure they include foster carers’ feedback. The Council confirms it has reviewed and amended the report, and the new format is now in use.
7. Review procedures and guidelines regarding health and safety/risk assessments when a foster carer has been attacked by a child in their care. The Council confirms this piece of work is outstanding.
8. Respond to Mrs Y’s request for compensation for cancelled trips. The Council asked for proof of expenditure which Mrs Y did not provide.
9. Remind social workers to record relevant email correspondence in case files. The Council says this is subject to ongoing reviews.
10. Review the foster carer training program and ensure sufficient information is provided on policies, procedures and guidelines when a child goes missing. The Council confirms it reviewed and updated relevant policies.
11. Ensure the standard allegation letter is sent in all cases as per the policy. The Council says this is ongoing and an outcome letter is to be established.
12. Following the resignation of a foster carer, the Council should consider and record how it intends to support the carer until the final date of placement. The Council says this is standard practice which it will continue to follow
13. Review the training provided to social workers in children’s services. The Council confirms training was provided following a recent re-structure.
14. Consider a financial remedy in line with our Remedies Guidance for the delays in concluding Mrs Y’s complaint. The Council offered to make a £200 payment on 28 March 2024.
63. There are three areas of action which the Council has not provided an update about. We have asked the Council to provide evidence of those actions.
64. It is also my view that the Council has not provided an appropriate personal remedy for Mrs Y. Both the Council’s investigation and our own has identified uncertainty and distress caused by fault which the Council has agreed to recognise with a symbolic payment of £750. This is in addition to the £200 already offered.

Back to top

Action

65. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• Pay £750 to Mrs Y. This is in recognition of the distress and uncertainty caused by the areas of fault identified both in the Council’s own investigation and furthermore in this statement; and
• Provide evidence of the action taken for the outstanding remedies (paragraph 62 points 2, 7 and 11). If the service improvements are ongoing, the Council should provide an anticipated timescale for completion.
66. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

67. There is unremedied personal injustice which the Council has agreed to provide a symbolic remedy for. There are also areas of service improvement which the Council has not yet confirmed completion of. The Council will complete the agreed actions to remedy the injustice caused by fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman