Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with a staying put arrangement. The Council was at fault for failing to explain the financial aspect of the staying put arrangement, poor communication and delaying in making payments. This caused Ms X distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X and make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council failed to adhere to a staying put arrangement made in respect of a young person in her care, making changes without notice and failed to make agreed payments. She further complains that the Council failed to properly consider her complaint.
2. Ms X says this has caused her financial distress as she has missed out on payments. She also said this caused her and the young person distress. She says she will never foster again because of this situation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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(1), as amended)
4. 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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Staying put arrangements

8. Young people who were previously looked after children can remain with their former foster carers after their eighteenth birthday under a staying put arrangement. Councils have a duty to monitor these arrangements and to provide assistance and support, including financial support. These duties continue until the young person is 21.

The Council’s staying put policy

9. The policy says the staying put arrangements will end at the young person’s twenty-first birthday or when the arrangement ends by either part prior to this date.
10. It also says the Council needs to ensure carers are given clear information about how they can expect to be supported if they enter a staying put arrangement. To ensure sufficient time is available to make necessary planning arrangements, a meeting should take place three months before a young person’s sixteenth birthday. This meeting should explore the impact on a foster carers’ financial circumstances should the placement continue after the young person’s eighteenth birthday.
11. Meetings should take place after this to confirm arrangements, and these meetings should make reference to the criteria and financial framework for extending the staying put caring arrangement.
12. The policy notes that if a young person is at university and living away from home during term time, a staying put caring arrangement can still be made to ensure they can return home for the university holidays and weekends. The Council will pay the staying put caring rate for the times the young person is at home, and will agree a financial arrangement with the carer, if it is necessary, to ensure the placement is kept open and available for use by the young person. This decision will be made at the discretion of the assistant director and will be made in the best interests of the young person.
13. Once agreed, a staying put caring arrangement can extend until the young person moves to their independent tenancy or reaches their twenty first birthday (or until the end of the academic year of any education/training course being undertaken on their twenty first birthday, with monitoring of the arrangement being undertaken by a personal advisor.
14. The staying put arrangement can be ended at any time before the young person reaches their twenty first birthday, by giving a minimum of 28 days’ notice.
15. If the young person wishes to remain with the carer post 21, it will become a private or informal arrangement, and no longer funded by the Council. However, funding may be considered to support an agreed course of education, but not necessarily at the level agreed as part of staying put caring.

Council complaint policy

16. The Council says it will respond to stage one complaints within ten working days. It will review stage two decisions within 20 working days, but if a delay arises, it will contact a complainant, explain the reason for the delay and agree a new response date.

What happened?

17. Ms X was a foster carer for Ms Y for many years.
18. The Council met with Ms X and Ms Y in 2019, when Ms Y was 17, to explain the staying put arrangement. During this meeting, the Council explained that if Ms Y went on to study at university after finishing school, it would hold a panel meeting to decide if it could continue to fund a staying put agreement.
19. Ms Y said she intended to study at university for more than three years. The Council noted that if this were the case, it would need to hold a panel meeting to agree funding beyond age 21. The Council also recorded that Ms X and Ms Y understood these plans and the need for flexibility depending on Ms Y’s plans.
20. Council records from February 2020 noted that the Council would need to meet with Ms X to discuss the financial aspect of the staying put arrangement so that she understood this.
21. Ms Y turned 18 in early 2020. Ms X continued to support Ms Y under a staying put arrangement.
22. The Council funded Ms Y’s placement with Ms X full time, alongside Ms Y’s university accommodation from September 2020.
23. Ms Y turned 21 in early 2023.
24. Ms X contacted the Council early December 2023 as she was unhappy the Council had not made a staying put payment as usual. She said the Council failed to tell her these payments would stop. She also said the Council told her payments would continue until Ms Y finished her university course mid-2024.
25. The Council said it would respond to Ms X when it had made a decision about this matter. Ms X chased an update several times.
26. The Council held a panel meeting later in December 2023. It decided that starting from December 2023, it would only pay Ms X for the time that Ms Y spent at her home, rather than continue to fund a full-time placement. The Council continued to make full time payments until April 2024, which covered Ms Y’s Christmas and Easter university holidays, which she spent at home with Ms X.
27. The Council met with Ms X and Ms Y in February 2024. Ms X disagreed with only being paid for the time that Ms Y stayed with her. She said her home is Ms Y’s home and she wanted her to be able to come and go as she pleased. Ms X noted she supports Ms Y daily with unplanned emotional and financial support. Ms X also said her spare bedroom was used for fostering and if the Council did not fund Ms Y’s place with her fulltime, she would need to return to fostering for her own finances. This would make the bedroom unavailable for Ms Y. The Council agreed to discuss this at senior management level and get back to Ms X with a decision.
28. Ms X contacted the Council again early July 2024. She explained that despite the Council agreeing to continue Ms Y’s staying put arrangement until the end of her university course, the payments for May and June 2024 were overdue.
29. The Council contacted Ms X again mid-July, apologising for the delay. It clarified that the staying put policy is until age 21 and Ms Y turned 22 in early 2024. The Council said it paid Ms X the full amount up until 14 April 2024 and a reduced amount from 22 April to 5 May when Ms Y was visiting Ms X.
30. Ms X replied the same day. She said the Council was wrong because it had not told her of any contract changes or reduced payments. She noted that she only found out in late 2023 about funding for post 21-year-olds. Ms X said that despite the Council holding a panel meeting after this, it did not tell her of any changes and so she expected the Council to continue to make payments until Ms Y finished university. Ms X asked the Council to make the full monthly payments for May and June 2024.
31. As the Council did not respond to this, Ms X made a complaint about the same matters to the Council on mid-August 2024.
32. The Council responded to Ms X’s stage one complaint at the end of September 2024. It apologised for the delay in responding to the complaint and said this was because of the amount of information it needed to consider.
33. The Council explained it decided at a panel meeting in December 2023, and confirmed in February 2024, that it would only pay Ms X for the time that Ms Y spent with her at her home. The Council said it continued to make payments until April 2024, which covered the university Christmas and Easter holidays.
34. The Council noted that several senior managers had all told Ms X that it would not make any further payments, in addition to those already made and concluded the payments already made were generous, fair and outside of the usual policy for supporting young people that are at university. The Council did not uphold Ms X’s complaint about the staying put arrangement.
35. The Council did uphold Ms X’s complaint about poor communication. It acknowledged this had been poor and confusing. This included the Council wrongly telling Ms X that when Ms Y turned 21, the staying put arrangement would continue for the duration of Ms Y’s university course. The Council admitted this was wrong information and not in line with the staying put arrangement.
36. The Council also acknowledged it did not give her notice that payment would end in late 2023 and delayed telling her about the outcome of the panel review. The Council said it did not give her written notice of the changes and continued to make payments until April 2024 which caused her confusion.
37. The Council apologised for this poor communication and the distress this caused her and Ms Y.
38. Ms X was unhappy with the stage one complaint response and so asked the Council to escalate this to stage two.
39. The Council responded to Ms X’s stage two complaint at the end of November 2024, which agreed with the outcome of the stage one complaint.
40. The Council reviewed Ms X’s complaint a third time in January 2025. It concluded it was satisfied that a thorough and full investigation had already taken place and the outcome of this was fair.

Findings

Staying put arrangement

41. The Council’s policy is clear that several meetings should take place before a staying put arrangement starts to ensure that a carer understands the financial implications of the agreement. I welcome that the Council started planning meetings with Ms X and Ms Y in 2019, before the agreement started. But, I also note that although the Council recorded in February 2020 it would need to hold a separate meeting with Ms X to discuss the financial aspect of the arrangement to ensure she understood these, there is no evidence that this ever took place. This is not in line with the Council’s policy, and was fault, which caused Ms X uncertainty about the financial aspect of the staying put arrangement.
42. The Council has already accepted fault for stopping payments to Ms X in December 2023 without explaining the reasons for this. This caused Ms X distress and uncertainty. I welcome that the Council did go on to make full payments to Ms X until April 2024, but note there was a delay in doing so, one which caused Ms X frustration in continually chasing these. I will recommend a further remedy for the injustice this caused.
43. Following this, the Council held a panel meeting in December 2023 to discuss the staying put arrangement. It decided that going forward, it would only pay Ms X for the time that Ms Y spent at her home, rather than continuing to pay her for the full-time placement. As Ms Y was over the age of 21 at this time, this is a decision the Council was entitled to make in line with its policy, and one made without fault. This is because the policy says funding may be considered to support an agreed course of education, but not necessarily at the level agreed as part of staying put caring.
44. But, I note that following this decision, there is no evidence the Council told Ms X about these changes, and she expected the Council to make payment for the remainder of the academic year. The Council’s failure to properly tell Ms X of the changes it had made to the staying put arrangement payments and failing to give notice of the changes was fault. This caused Ms X unnecessary distress and uncertainty. Had Ms X been aware of the changes, she could have then made an informed decision about Ms Y’s living arrangements and her own finances.
45. I have considered a remedy for the injustice caused by this. We do not normally recommend remedies that reimburse loss of earnings. This is because we cannot reach conclusive findings on such matters through our investigations. We cannot usually, on balance, establish a clear link between any fault and the claimed injustice of lost earnings. There are often other factors, such as personal circumstances involved. Such payments are therefore best resolved by the courts. If Ms X is unhappy about any loss of earnings, she has the option of seeking legal advice. But, I will recommend the Council make a symbolic payment for the distress and uncertainty it caused.

Complaint handling

46. The Council’s complaint policy says it will respond to stage one complaints within ten working days. In this case, it took the Council 34 working days to respond. This was fault, which caused Ms X frustration. The Council should apologise for this.

Back to top

Action

47. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Ms X for the identified faults. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making its apology;
• make a payment of £400 to Ms X. This is to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the Council’s poor communication, failing to explain the financial aspect of the arrangement and delaying in making payments; and
• review the current staying put policy to consider adding that all decisions made about an agreement should be confirmed to all concerned in writing.
48. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman