Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Leeds City Council (09 011 462)

Category : Children's care services > Looked after children

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 01 Jul 2011


Serious and extensive failures in Leeds City Council’s provision of education and care services resulted in substantial injustice for vulnerable children and their parents.

The complaint

The Ombudsman issued reports on three different complaints where her investigations found the Council’s service provision was inadequate. All the complaints involved children with special educational needs.

The complaints involved the actions of both the Council and the children’s schools, and the Ombudsman commented that she could not give a complete and comprehensive account as she only has power to investigate complaints about schools from pupils or their parents in 14 local authority areas, and Leeds was not one of them.

In one complaint, a severely disabled girl was left in a situation where, at times:

  • the people caring for and educating her were unable to communicate with her as none of the available staff was competent in British Sign Language
  • there were not enough staff to help her use the toilet, so she returned home in wet trousers, developed blisters and broken skin and suffered urinary tract infections, and
  • the unsuitable and noisy environment meant that she had only very limited use of her cochlear implant – fitted at some cost to the NHS and with some risk to her.

The Council failed as an education authority to ensure that the provision specified in the girl’s statement of special educational needs was made. The Council had information from various sources that her needs were not being met, but it neither made further enquiries nor took any action. The Ombudsman said “It cannot use its failure to properly inform itself as an excuse for its failure to fulfil its statutory duty.”

The Council also failed as a children’s services authority to assess the girl’s needs and those of her family and to provide adequate respite care. As a result, the girl and her family had to struggle through and hold together under enormous strain.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council take specific action in each case and pay sums of compensation to remedy the identified injustice to the parents and foster parents who complained.

When an investigation identifies serious failings, the Ombudsman normally recommends that a council should undertake a thorough review of the way a service is organised and delivered. But she recognises that the Council has reviewed and reorganised its education and children’s service and therefore does not recommend further review.

She said: “I recognise that the Council has taken significant steps… to improve the personal education plans for looked after children and statements of special education needs”, and that she is aware of the Council’s major reorganisation of education and children’s services that has brought them together in a unified management structure that should be fully implemented by the end of 2011 to provide a single integrated service for the most challenged families.



Print this page