Summary: Mrs Y complained about the Council’s decision to end her foster son, X’s staying put arrangement with her and Mr B. She said the Council failed to take proper account of X’s mental health and need for support. We find the Council was at fault for failing to communicate with Mrs Y and Mr B and failing to include all required information in the arrangement. This led to Mrs Y and Mr B feeling unsupported by the Council. We make several recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs Y, complained about the Council’s decision to end her foster son, X’s, staying put arrangement with her and Mr B. She said the decision was abrupt with no notice given to her or Mr B. She said she felt unsupported by the Council during a difficult time. She said the Council failed to take proper account of X’s mental health and need for support.

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. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
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(i), 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mrs Y and the Council.
6. Mrs Y and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. The Children and Families Act 2014 introduced ‘staying put agreements’. The Act required councils to facilitate and arrange these agreements which would extend looked after young people’s relationships with their foster carers beyond childhood up to the age of 21 or, in certain circumstances, longer, if the young person and the foster carers wish it.
8. Councils have a duty to act as if they were parents to children who are in their care and towards young adults who were formerly in their care.
9. Among their duties is to create a ‘pathway plan’ for such children and young adults which they must review regularly. The plan should set out a plan to achieve the young person’s potential over the coming months and years and say what the Council will do to help achieve it. This should take into consideration the wishes and feelings of the young person and the foster carer.
10. Although local authorities can provide ‘staying put’ arrangements to any care leaver, a specific duty was placed on local authorities in section 23CZA of the Children Act 1989. This duty places a legal requirement on local authorities to advise, assist and support both the young person and their former foster carers when they wish to stay living together after the former relevant child reaches their 18th birthday.
11. The staying put guidance says it is open to young people who have disabilities, or who are at university, on an apprenticeship, seeking asylum or in the armed forces.
12. Local authorities should consider supporting a young person in a ‘staying put’ arrangement if they are living away from home. Such circumstances might include a residential further education institution; undertaking induction training for the armed services or other training or employment programmes that require a young person to live away from home.
13. The Council’s staying put policy says its purpose is to provide guidance for foster carers who continue to look after young people post 18 years. The staying put fee is paid at the same rate as the fostering fee but is capped at the maximum rate of £250 per week per young person.

What did happen?

14. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology
15. In 2019, the Council’s panel agreed to a staying put arrangement for X. It said the arrangement will be in place until X enters the Army or he reaches 21.
16. In January 2020, X transferred to the leaving and aftercare team from the children in care team following his eighteenth birthday. The staying put arrangement named X’s personal adviser (PA 1). It said the arrangement may last a few months or may be extended up to the young person reaching age 21, depending on the success of the arrangement and the wishes of all concerned.
17. In March 2020, X made the decision to not have contact with PA 1. But he said if he needs support, he will contact them. PA 1 contacted Mrs Y for X’s contact details. Mrs Y confirmed X’s wishes to not share information.
18. In April and August 2020, communication between PA 1 and Mrs Y continued. This was to discuss X’s social and emotional wellbeing.
19. In September 2020, Mrs Y and PA 1 discussed X’s career in the Army and the support Mrs Y provides for him. Mrs Y said X does not want contact with PA 1 because of previous involvement with social care. PA 1 asked if Mrs Y could ask X for written consent for her to update his social care, pathway plan and staying put reviews.
20. Mrs Y then asked PA 1 why the Council would be reviewing the staying put agreement annually. This is because she believed the agreement was in place until X was 21. PA 1 explained having a staying put agreement for someone employed by the Army, and mostly away, was not of the true essence of the provision. This is because part of the agreement is for the young person to use the staying put location as their main home. PA 1 explained regarding X, there would be a private rental agreement between them both if the agreement ended.
21. In the same month, PA 1 told Mrs Y she had sent a letter to X advising she is leaving. She gave details of X’s new PA 2 and asked X for consent to share information.
22. In January 2021, the staying put arrangement ended. Mrs Y told PA 2, X would be returning home from the Army due to Covid-19 restrictions for two weeks.
23. In the following month, Mrs Y asked PA 2 what had happened with the staying put agreement. PA 2 discussed with colleague’s X’s wishes to remain on the staying put agreement. It was agreed as the Council’s panel made the decision to review the staying put agreement, it must go back to them. PA 2 updated Mrs Y and Mr B.
24. In the same month, PA 2 spoke to X and discussed support and requirements of the staying put agreement. She said if X does not want social care involvement or contact, he needs to write to the Council and that this will impact on his staying put agreement.
25. In March 2021, Mrs Y told the Council X had suffered a serious assault while in the Army. It agreed to keep in contact with Mrs Y to find out what support was in place for X. X returned from the Army on compassionate leave for two weeks.
26. The case was re-presented to the panel in the following month. It said the Council’s staying put policy does not factor in young people who are in the Army. But said it should be in the best interests of the young person, namely those who are vulnerable. It agreed a discretionary arrangement and backdated staying put payments to January 2021. It agreed to review the arrangements in July 2021. PA 2 updated Mrs Y.
27. In June 2021, PA 2 told X he would be allocated a new PA 3 as she was leaving. X said he was happy for PA 3 to contact him directly.
28. The records show in June 2021, PA 2’s handover to PA 3. She discussed support for X from Mrs Y, and that X shares more information with her. PA 3 then contacted X. PA 3 introduced herself to X and passed on her contact details. She called him the following month. X said he was doing well. He consented to her contacting Mrs Y and Mr B if he could not answer the phone due to his job.
29. The panel reviewed the staying put arrangement in July 2021. It agreed to extend the staying put fee to allow further discussions with X about his long-term plans in the Army and the pending investigation. It agreed to review the arrangements in October 2021.
30. In September 2021, PA 3 met with X as he had returned home. X said he was getting on much better. He said there was an investigation into the serious assault he suffered. He said the Army was supporting him. X said he does not need support from the Council or any other service. But he understood he could reach out at a later point if needed. He agreed to continue contact every 8 weeks.
31. On 13 October 2021, the Council reviewed X’s pathway plan and X said he was good at most of his independent skills. It told X, as he was working full time and spending up to three days at the most at home, he no longer met the criteria to continue in a staying put agreement. The notes state X wanted to remain on the agreement. But he understood that he could arrange a private agreement if he wished to with Mrs Y and Mr B.
32. The panel reviewed the staying put arrangements on 26 October 2021. It agreed to continue the staying put fee until 5 November 2021, after which it would cease.
33. On 29 October 2021, the Army told Mrs Y, X would be assessed by the mental health team because of him having a mental health breakdown. She said as she had no contact details for PA 3, she informed her social worker.
34. On 5 November 2021, PA 3 advised Mrs Y and X, the staying put agreement would end on the 8 November 2021. It said X will continue to receive support and guidance. Mrs Y questioned the lack of communication and support and why the arrangement had ended. She said X’s mental health was declining. Mrs Y chased the Council for a response. She said she was unsure of who X’s PA was. PA 3 responded and explained the reasons for ending the agreement. She confirmed she was X’s PA.
35. X advised PA 3 on 10 November 2021, the Army had asked him to take leave due to his mental health. He said he did not want any further referrals for mental health support, as he was happy with the support provided by the Army.
36. On 11 November 2021, following Mrs Y and her social worker arranging a meeting with PA 3 to discuss how best to support X, PA 3 asked X if he was able to attend and whether he consented to information being shared. X said he was not in a good place to talk. But he consented to PA 3 talking to Mrs Y and her social worker.
37. On 18 November 2021 the Army discharged X because of severe difficulties with his mental health.
38. Mrs Y questioned the lack of contact from the Council about ending the staying put agreement. The Council said X, as an adult, was to tell Mrs Y and Mr B of the decision and arrange a private arrangement. It said due to the delay in distributing its letter, it informed Mrs Y and Mr B of its decision late. PA 3 arranged to send Mrs Y consent to share, for X to sign.
39. On 25 November 2021, Mrs Y told the Council she had only received the staying put fee up to 5 November. The Council said it had told her in error the agreement would end on 8 November 2021.
40. In the following month, the consent to share noted X gave consent for PA 3 to consult with friends and family only. On 20 December 2021, X’s mental health seriously deteriorated. PA 3 called Mrs Y the next day. She offered support with referrals but said she would need X’s consent to continue.
41. In the same month, Mrs Y told PA 3 she feels that once again, she is doing a lot of monitoring of X’s mental health whilst he is not on the staying put agreement. X received care from the hospital’s mental health and assessment team. But PA 3 said because of issues with consent, she was restricted on what information the mental health team can share.
42. PA 3 then contacted the community mental health team. The community mental health team told the Council X had declined receiving additional support. But the team said it gave him a safety card with support numbers. PA 3 sent a message to X to ensure he still has the contact numbers and knows he could contact the Council if he wanted further support.
43. Mrs Y and her social worker contacted the Council on the 24 December 2021. They questioned why the Council was not supporting X during this difficult time. They asked the Council to supply a support package for X as a matter of urgency.
44. The Council responded. It said it had spoken with X who said he was fine.
45. On 27 December 2021, Mrs Y told the Council, X’s mental health had deteriorated. She took him to A&E. It sent X home with a plan for Mrs Y to manage. She asked that no one contact him.
46. The Council called Mrs Y on 31 December 2021 to check how X was.
47. In the following month, Mrs Y asked PA 3 for clarification about a meeting with X. The notes state this was to discuss how X wanted to be supported.
48. In February 2022, Mrs Y asked the Council why it had not taken the staying put arrangement back to the panel now X was no longer in the Army. She chased up a response. The Council responded the following month. It apologised for the delay. But it said it cannot reinstate the staying put arrangement. It said PA 3 is happy to offer X support.
49. In June 2022, the Council reviewed X’s pathway plan. X said he has the support he wants from Mrs Y and does not want it from the Council. X’s housing situation was discussed. PA 3 said without an up-to-date permission to share, she could not make referrals for him.
50. PA 3 advised X she would be leaving the team in August 2022.

Analysis

51. The guidance says the living together agreement needs to consider and include duration, review, and termination. The agreement in place does not include this information. The Council has a duty to ensure all parties are clear on what the agreement includes. Therefore, this is fault.
52. In 2020, Mrs Y and Mr B were aware the Council would review the staying put agreement annually. The Council’s staying put policy does not cover young people in the armed forces. However, the Council told us it continued to pay a weekly staying put fee when X was stationed overseas in the Army between September 2020 and November 2021. In April 2021 the panel also considered X’s situation. It exercised discretion and agreed to extend the staying put agreement with further reviews. This was communicated to Mrs Y. The Council explained it had been extended as an exceptional circumstance. I am satisfied Mrs Y and Mr B were aware there was a possibility the arrangement could end.
53. The guidance says, the local authority will want to ensure that the end of a ‘staying put’ arrangement is not another ‘cliff edge’ for the young person but a gradual transition to independent living. I am satisfied that the Council had discussions with X about him no longer meeting its staying put criteria. The Council also offered support to X, which he refused.
54. X agreed PA 3 could contact him direct. PA 3 made the decision to communicate decisions with X with a view that he would inform Mrs Y and Mr B. This meant Mrs Y had no contact details for PA 3. She said she could not tell her about the mental health crisis X was suffering with before the Council made the decision to end the staying put agreement. It is my view that this would not have changed the Council’s decision as it said X no longer met its criteria. The Council said although the staying put agreement had ended, it would still offer support to X. The Council included X in its decisions. It made attempts to get consent from X. But as it had consent to consult with friends and family only, it could not contact other agencies.
55. The guidance says local authorities should assist and support both the young person and their former foster carers. The Council did not always keep in touch with Mrs Y and Mr B. Therefore, this is fault. This caused them uncertainty. If their views had been sought, there might have been earlier intervention for X.
56. The decision to end the staying put agreement letter issued to Mrs Y and Mr B on 5 November 2021 included incorrect information. The guidance says ‘do make sure discussions and decisions are recorded in meeting minutes, plans and case records and that these are communicated to everyone involved’. Whilst PA 3 had discussions with X about ending the arrangement, the Council told Mrs Y and Mr B on the day of it ending and gave the wrong dates. This is fault, as this would have caused them uncertainty and little to no time to prepare.

Back to top

Agreed actions

57. To address the injustice caused by fault, within one month of the date of this final decision the Council have agreed to:

• Apologise to Mrs Y and Mr B.
• Pay Mrs Y and Mr B £150 each to acknowledge their avoidable frustration and uncertainty.

58. Within two months, the Council have agreed to issue written reminders to relevant staff to ensure they are aware of the staying put guidance, specifically in relation to:

• making sure discussions and decisions are recorded in meeting minutes, plans and case records and that these are communicated to everyone involved.
• The living together agreement considering and including duration, review, and termination.

The Council should also provide evidence that it has followed the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

59. Subject to further comments by Mrs Y and the Council, I intend to complete my investigation based on recommendations above.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman