Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council failed to consider their human rights and the fostering services national minimum standards during the Local Authority Designated Officer process. They also say the Council did not give them an opportunity to respond to the allegations against them until it concluded the process. We find the Council was at fault for failing to follow its guidance and tell Mr and Mrs X about the allegations before it concluded the process. This caused Mr and Mrs X distress, upset and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Mr and Mrs X, make a payment to them and implement service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complained the Council failed to consider their human rights and the fostering services national minimum standards during the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) process. They say the Council did not give them an opportunity to respond to the allegations against them until it concluded the process.
2. Mr and Mrs X say they felt no other choice but to resign as foster carers. They say they are worried about whether a substantiated LADO outcome will have any impact with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).

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 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. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (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 evidence provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr and Mrs X 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

Allegations against foster carers

8. The fostering service national minimum standards (the standards) says investigations into allegations against carers should be carried out fairly, quickly and consistently and in a way that provides protection to the child but also support to the person subject to the investigation (standard 22.9). Foster carers should be told in writing about any allegations against them and given information about the timescale for completing the investigation. They should also be told about the payment of allowance and any fee while investigations are continuing.
9. The LADO is a person responsible for managing and overseeing investigations into allegations that somebody who works with children has behaved in a way that may pose a risk to children. The LADO is not the decision maker, but they will provide advice and guidance to employers.
10. The fostering minimum standards say “Allegations against people that work with children or members of the fostering household are reported by the fostering service to the LADO. This includes allegations that on the face of it may appear relatively insignificant or that have also been reported directly to the police or Children and Family Services.”
11. One of the standards for fostering services (standard 22.10) is to “ensure that a clear distinction is made between investigation into allegations of harm and discussions over standards of care. Investigations which find no evidence of harm should not become procedures looking into poor standards of care - these should be treated separately.”

The Council’s policy on managing allegations of abuse against people who work with children

12. The policy says the senior manager should inform the accused person about the allegation as soon as possible after consulting the LADO.
13. Where the best method for sharing information and deciding next steps is to hold a meeting, the LADO will convene a strategy meeting.

The Council’s allegations guidance for foster carers and prospective adopters

14. This guidance says a LADO investigation is likely to include meetings or discussion with the child, the foster carer and other relevant people in the child’s network.
15. A further LADO meeting or discussion will be held to agree the outcome of the investigation.

The Council’s standards of care concerns policy

16. As well as allegations that are overseen by the LADO, there may be standards of care concerns that require investigation.
17. Standards of care concerns will generally relate to worries about the conduct, attitude or practices of the foster carer. This is different to the LADO process which looks at allegations of harm or risks of harm.

The Human rights Act 1998

18. The Human Rights Act 1998 (the Act) sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that everyone in the UK is entitled to. This includes the right to life, freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, liberty and security of person, a fair hearing (article six), respect for private and family life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom from forced labour, and education. The Act requires all local authorities - and other bodies carrying out public functions - to respect and protect individuals’ rights.
19. The Ombudsman’s remit does not extend to making decisions on whether or not a body in jurisdiction has breached the Human Rights Act – this can only be done by the courts. But the Ombudsman can make decisions about whether or not a body in jurisdiction has had due regard to an individual’s human rights in their treatment of them, as part of our consideration of a complaint.

What happened

20. This chronology provides an overview of key events in this case and does not detail everything that happened.
21. Mr and Mrs X were foster carers for a child (Child Y). Mrs X contacted the Council in early February and said Child Y had been searching for explicit content on the internet and impersonating other people.
22. The Council visited Mrs X at home to discuss the issues. It suggested making a referral to the therapeutic fostering team and getting a skills coach for Child Y. It sent an email the following week and said Child Y’s therapist could offer further sessions. It also said it could make a referral for Mrs X to get some therapeutic support and a referral to the harmful sexual behaviours team so Child Y could get some specialist support.
23. Mrs X contacted the Council and said Child Y had looked at explicit content on the internet with another device. She said she had not told Mr X. The Council encouraged her to tell Mr X. It also said it was happy to arrange a meeting to discuss the issues further.
24. The Council had an unannounced visit at Mr and Mrs X’s house. Mr X was not present for the visit. It had a follow up call with Mrs X after the visit. Mrs X said there had been a further incident with Child Y accessing inappropriate material. She said she had not told Mr X. The Council said it was important for her to tell Mr X. It also said it would chase the support from the therapeutic service.
25. The Council arranged for Child Y to access some respite care due to the ongoing issues. It contacted Mrs X and explained it would investigate the concerns through a standards of care concerns investigation. It said it had consulted with the LADO, but they decided it was better for the concerns to continue through the standards of care concerns process.
26. The Council shared its standards of care concerns report with Mr and Mrs X in April. This included issues about Mrs X’s ability to work with professionals and comments Child Y had made about Mr and Mrs X. Mr and Mrs X provided a detailed response to the concerns. They agreed to the Council’s recommendations of a collaborative mapping meeting.
27. Before the Council completed the standards of care concerns process, it made a referral to the LADO. The Council said it was concerned about Child Y accessing explicit content and Mrs X not sharing information with Mr X. It also said Child Y had shared further concerns about his home experiences since he had returned home from respite care.
28. The LADO decided the threshold had been met and arranged a strategy meeting. The meeting took place a few days later. Participants of the meeting discussed the issues in the referral and shared other information about Mr and Mrs X and Child Y. They also shared an allegation of physical abuse from Mr and Mrs X’s former foster child.
29. The LADO asked whether Mr and Mrs X were aware of the LADO referral and the meeting. An officer said they were not aware.
30. The outcome from the LADO process was substantiated because professionals were concerned about Mr and Mrs X’s ability to meet Child Y’s emotional needs. The threshold was not met for a referral to the DBS. There was a discussion in the meeting about the LADO outcome as there were two elements (emotional and physical). The LADO said the physical aspect was the smaller component of the meeting.
31. The Council visited Mr and Mrs X to discuss the LADO outcome and the nature of the allegations. It explained it would need to refer them to the fostering panel. The fostering panel would decide what the outcome would be. It said it could offer respite care for Child Y. It also said it would send them the LADO outcome summary two weeks before the fostering panel. This was so Mr and Mrs X could get support and advice from their foster union representative. It told Mr and Mrs X about the allegation of physical abuse from their former foster child. It said the child’s social worker would discuss the allegations with the child. This could potentially result in another LADO referral.
32. A representative from a fostering support network emailed the Council and said it had failed to share its concerns with Mr and Mrs X before it completed the LADO process. The Council emailed Mr and Mrs X and said it had raised concerns with them since February. It decided to address the issues through the standards of care concerns process. However, Child Y then raised further concerns which escalated the process to the LADO. It said they could respond to the outcome summary from the LADO. The LADO would consider any new information.
33. Mr and Mrs X provided a detailed response to the LADO outcome summary. The LADO read the reply and confirmed the outcome remained the same, but they would add the response to Mr and Mrs X’s file.
34. Mr and Mrs X emailed the Council and resigned as foster carers. They said they felt bullied during the standards of care and LADO investigation. They said the Council had not provided them with a fair hearing.
35. The Council visited Mr and Mrs X. It said it had a duty to tell the DBS they were resigning as foster carers and that had it gone to panel, its recommendation would have been to de-register them as foster carers. It said the referral to the DBS was not just a result of the LADO outcome but its collective concerns about them as foster carers.
36. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Council about the LADO process. They said it made its decision before it gave them a chance to respond. They said it had failed to consider their human rights and sections 22.9 and 22.10 of the standards.
37. The Council responded to the complaint. It said it told them about the LADO outcome the following Monday (the meeting took place on a Thursday). This was to avoid a situation where they did not have any support over the weekend. It also said it shared its concerns about their ability to meet Child Y’s needs in supervision sessions and meetings.

Back to top

Analysis

38. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made their decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or not properly explained a decision it has made. We call this fault, and, where we find it, we can consider any consequences of the fault and ask the relevant council to address these.
39. However, we do not make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf, provide a right of appeal against their decisions, or seek to replace their judgement with our own.
40. The Council’s allegations guidance for foster carers and prospective adopters states in the initial LADO meeting officers must agree plans for informing the foster carer about the allegation. It also says an investigation is likely to include a meeting or discussion with the foster carers. The LADO will arrange another meeting once officers have gathered the relevant information. In Mr and Mrs X’s case, the Council completed the LADO process in the first strategy meeting. This meant Mr and Mrs X were unaware of the allegations, and they did not have a chance to respond until afterwards. This is fault.
41. The Council said Mr and Mrs X were aware of the concerns through the supervision sessions and meetings. I agree they were aware of some of the Council’s concerns. However, they were unaware of the new allegations that escalated the matter to the LADO. This is fault. Mr and Mrs X provided a detailed response when they eventually received the LADO outcome summary. The LADO reviewed their comments and said it would not change the outcome. The LADO oversees the investigation. They are not the decision maker. Therefore, it was inappropriate for them to decide Mr and Mrs X’s comments did not change the outcome.
42. The Council’s faults have caused Mr and Mrs X distress and upset. I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, what the outcome would have been even if the Council had not been at fault. However, Mr and Mrs X have now been left with some uncertainty which the Council needs to remedy. Mr and Mrs X want the substantiated LADO outcome to be removed but this is not something we can achieve.
43. Mr and Mrs X say the LADO outcome summary did not reflect all the concerns professionals shared in the strategy meeting. They also say the outcome summary did not include the allegation of physical harm. I am satisfied the outcome summary reflects the main issues professionals raised in the strategy meeting. I would not expect the summary to reflect every point that professionals discussed. The allegation of physical harm was a secondary issue. The substantiated outcome was under the category of emotional harm and not physical harm. The Council explained to Mr and Mrs X a social worker would visit their former foster child to get their views about the allegation, and it could warrant a further LADO referral.
44. Mr and Mrs X also say the Council did not meet standards 22.9 and 22.10 (paragraphs 8 and 11 of this statement). With regards to standard 22.9, the investigation was carried out quickly and the Council did offer Mr and Mrs X some support. However, I am not satisfied it was done fairly for the reasons explained in paragraphs 40 and 41 of this statement.
45. The LADO investigation looked at whether Mr and Mrs X caused Child Y harm. This was separate to the standards of care concerns process. Therefore, I do not accept Mr and Mrs X’s assertion the Council failed to adhere to standard 22.10. The standards of care concerns investigation was important information for professionals to share during the strategy meeting.
46. Finally, Mr and Mrs X say the Council did not consider article 6 of the Act which says they should be given a right to a fair trial. The LADO process is not a trial or a hearing. It is for the employer to decide whether to take disciplinary action after a substantiated outcome. However, I would agree that Mr and Mrs X did not have a fair opportunity to contribute to the process.

Back to top

Agreed action

47. By 20 June 2025 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr and Mrs X for the injustice caused by fault in this statement.
• Pay Mr and Mrs X £250 to reflect their injustice.
• Remind relevant staff that during the LADO process they must ensure they provide foster carers with an opportunity to respond to any allegations against them before the investigation is concluded.

48. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

49. There was fault by the Council, which caused Mr and Mrs X an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman