Summary: The complainant raised concerns about the time her daughter spent in the care of the Council. The Council carried out a thorough investigation, upholding most of the complaints and agreeing to take remedial action to improve services for children in care. The complainant wanted to be reassured that the recommended service improvements had been implemented. We accept the findings of fault already made by the Council, and it has provided evidence that most service recommendations have been carried out. There were some outstanding issues which the Council has agreed to address.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, complained that the Council’s Children Services failed to look after her daughter (Y) properly when in its care, and failed to carry out a proper transition for her from Children to Adult Services.
2. Ms X did not, when making a complaint to the Ombudsman, have Y’s consent to pursue a complaint on her behalf. Ms X made a complaint in her own right as Y’s parent.
3. Ms X says the Council’s failures have caused avoidable distress, frustration and missed opportunities. Ms X says that Y made a complaint in her own right.
4. Y has now given consent for Ms X to be involved.
5. The Council carried out a statutory investigation of the complainant’s concerns under the Children Act three stage complaints procedure, ending in consideration by an independent Review Panel. The Stage 2 report was completed in October 2022. It concluded that there had been serious failings.
6. In March 2023, a Director wrote to Ms X, accepting the final decision of the Review Panel and its recommendations. One of the recommendations was that an officer from Adult Services should meet the complainant and Y’s aunt to discuss communication, sharing of information and future plans, including family work, dependent on Y’s willingness to engage. The complainant says that she had specifically requested such a meeting with a senior officer, accompanied by Y’s aunt, but she had not heard anything further at the time she made the complaint to us.
7. The Review Panel accepted the Stage 2’s other recommendations, which were that the Council should:
1. review its template when parents agree for their child to go into care (section 20 of the Children Act);
2. review protocols for links between services for looked after children (LACs);
3. ensure effective handover between social workers and managers;
4. look at why the ‘red flags’ from the independent reviewing officer (IRO) were not responded to appropriately;
5. prepare a transition plan for Y to adulthood;
6. consider Y’s interest in seeing her father;
7. look at why the escalation process did not work and, in view of the significant failings by Children Services, to send the Review Panel’s report to the Director of Children Services.
8. At the Review Panel hearing, Ms X stated that she did not want a further apology or any symbolic payment for the injustice caused to herself and her family. Ms X says that, despite this, the Council wrote to her with a further apology and a small payment for her time and trouble. Ms X says she was insulted by this when she had made it clear that she was seeking to improve the future planning for Y and better services for all children in care.
9. Ms X has confirmed that she is also not seeking an apology or symbolic payments from our investigation, but instead wants to ensure services for children in care are improved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

10. 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)
11. 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)
12. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share the final decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

13. As the complaints have been investigated thoroughly, I did not reinvestigate matters. Instead, I focused on whether the Council had completed the service improvements recommendations.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

14. I made enquiries of the Council, considered the complaint investigation papers and spoke to Ms X on the telephone.
15. I issued a draft decision statement to Ms X and to the Council. Ms X provided further information and corrected some factual inaccuracies. Where appropriate, I have included Ms X’s additional comments in this final decision statement for the sake of completeness. But they have not altered the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

The relevant law on looked after children and care leavers

16. Under section 20 (s20) of the Children Act 1989 a council has a duty to accommodate a child if no-one has parental responsibility for the child/young person, the child is lost or abandoned or the person caring for the child is unable to continue to provide care and accommodation. Accommodation is usually provided in the form of placement with, for example, family and friends, a foster placement or a residential placement including supported lodgings or hostels. A child over the age of 16 can consent to s20 accommodation even if the parent does not consent.
17. Where a child is accommodated under s20, they become a looked after child and the Council has a number of responsibilities for looked after children in its care and when they leave care.
18. When a child is looked after the Council must have a care plan that includes how the child’s needs will be met.
19. Children in care have an Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) who is responsible for ensuring councils adhere to children’s care plans. They also chair the child’s statutory reviews, which normally takes place every six months. These are multi agency meetings where important decisions are made.
20. The 1989 Act places duties on councils to provide ongoing support for children leaving care and pathway plans. These duties continue until they reach age 21. If the council is helping them with education and training, the duty continues until age 25 or to the end of the agreed training (which can take them beyond their 25th birthday). 
21. Pathway plans should continue for all care leavers continuing in education or training. The plan should include details of the practical and financial support the council will provide. 

The IRO’s Handbook 2011

22. The IRO Handbook (2.2) says that “Effective care planning and review is underpinned by careful assessment of the needs of a child and making the right decisions about how best to meet those needs”. The objective of planning for permanency is to ensure that children have a secure, stable and loving family to support them through childhood and beyond (3.50).
23. The IRO is responsible to chair the statutory looked after child reviews at regular intervals (2.6).
24. If, following communication with the social worker, the IRO is satisfied that the arrangements in the care plan continue to meet the child’s needs or that the change does not have significant implications for the care plan and that a review is not necessary, a record of this agreement and the reasons for it should be placed on the child’s file.
25. The IRO (3.75) should consult with the child, where appropriate, and the child’s wishes and feelings about the impact of the proposed change on his/her life should be taken into consideration in reaching a decision as to whether a review is necessary. However, a review must be convened, prior to certain changes, including where a change of placement is proposed for a child who has remained settled and established with the same carer for a significant period of time. (3.77).
26. A care plan should be prepared before a child is placed or, if not practicable, within ten working days of the start of the placement. The IRO handbook says that:

“The review of the care plan is one of the key components with the care process….the care plan for each child should specify how the local authority proposes to respond to the full range of the child’s needs, taking into account his/her wishes and feelings”.

27. One of the statutory duties of the IRO (2.9) is to ensure “that any ascertained wishes and feelings of the child are given due consideration by the appropriate authority”. The IRO should promote the voice of the child.
28. The IRO, should, before every review, ensure that the child understands how an advocate could help and his/her entitlement to one (3.14).
29. The IRO Handbook (3.38) says that, as part of the review, consideration should be given to whether the placement is meeting the child’s needs, including considering the attachment between the child and the carer and those who are caring for him/her, how the local authority is ensuring that the placement provides the quality of care that the child needs and any change is necessary or likely to be necessary before the next review.

What happened

30. This is only a brief account.
31. Y has autism. Ms X was having difficulties in caring for her due to her serious self‑harming behaviours. Ms X says that Y was placed with a friend (by the Police) having been reported missing to them and refusing to return home. Y agreed to be accommodated by the Council under s20 (Y was 16 plus).
32. Ms X says that she only signed a s20 consent form, when asked to do so, because she was told that this meant she would be involved in the event of a medical emergency. She says that she was not given any advice about the meaning of a s20 agreement or that she could have asked for it to be revoked at any time.
33. Y was initially placed in a children’s home. Ms X says that Y should have had a social care assessment and support plan within 12 weeks of the placement. But this did not happen. The placement was jointly funded by the Council and by the health authority as Y was considered at risk of admission to a psychiatric unit. In January 2022 Y moved to semi-independent accommodation with support. Ms X retained parental responsibility.
34. Ms X considered that Y’s needs were not being met with a lack of planning and assessment. In particular, in June 2021 Ms X considered Y should have had a mental capacity assessment to ensure that Y had the capacity to make important decisions.
35. Ms X wanted to remain involved in Y’s life, but Y stated that she did not want her mother involved. However, Y was willing for her aunt to attend meetings. Ms X says that there was a constant change of social workers and a lack of preparation as Y was approaching adulthood. Y required a social care assessment by Adults Services, and a pathway plan (as a leaving care young person), which did not take place. Ms X was also concerned that, prior to going into care, Y had an excellent school attendance. But, since being in care, Ms X says that she stopped attending school and she was without education, activity or structure.
36. Y’s personal independence payment (PIP) was stopped, Ms X says that this occurred because the Council did not provide the necessary information to the Department of Work and Pensions (who manages these payments). In addition, Y was not given help to access her savings account when 18.
37. In June 2022, it was agreed that there should be a mental capacity test. Ms X is not entitled to see this report unless Y consents to this. Ms X says that, now that Y has consented to her involvement, she has not heard from the Council as to whether she is now entitled to see this assessment.

Findings

Complaint (a): failure in the s20 protocol

38. The original plan was that Y would be accommodated for a 12 week period to be assessed. The Stage 2 investigator found that Y was not assessed for twelve months (Ms X says it was sixteen months) while at the children’s home and semi-independent accommodation.
39. It also seems that Ms X was not aware of her legal rights to ask for the s20 to be revoked. However, even if Ms X had asked for this, the Council would have found it difficult to return Y home, if she was unwilling to go. Y was 16 plus so could agree to s20 without Ms X’s consent.
40. This complaint was partially upheld because Ms X had initially requested for Y to be accommodated. Ms X says that this is not accurate because she did not ask for Y to be accommodated; it is more that she had no other choice. However, while that might be the case, because I think the Stage 2 investigation was thorough, I accept the finding made.
41. It was agreed that the Council needed to improve its s20 procedures. The Council says that its guidance about parents’ rights under s20 has been recirculated to relevant social workers and new social workers. The Council has had discussions at a senior level, and there is now an expectation that there will be a case note on file, detailing how s20 was sought, the discussions and advice to parents and a signed s20 form. A manager now checks the files for children coming into care under s20 to ensure there is such a detailed case note. The Council is also trying to improve the joint working between relevant departments involved with young people in care.
42. In addition, the Council now arranges monthly meetings which focuses on children in care aged 17 plus, who do not have a clear plan for when 18. These meetings involve workers from the child in care team, the leaving care team, housing and education departments. And there is a similar multi-agency leaving care panel for those who need continued support post 18.
43. Ms X says that no child at 17 should be without a transition plan.
44. The Head of Children Safeguarding, and a Senior Solicitor, have been reviewing the s20 agreement form, and have now drafted a revised form, based on advice from an expert working group. There will also be accompanying detailed guidance and a shorter version when required. There is a further meeting soon to finalise the form and guidance. It is intended that the form and guidance may be published on the Council’s website.
45. Ms X says that she would have liked to have given feedback to the Council, based on her experiences, to improve the s20 agreement form and process. But the Council will have taken into account the points raised by Ms X from her complaints, which in turn initiated the review of the s20 protocol.
46. Ms X has pointed out that the Stage 2 officer recommended improvements to the s20 protocol in October 2022 and therefore there has been an unnecessary delay in improving the process. However, it was not until March 2023 that the Strategic Director accepted this recommendation. So, it has taken six months for the Council to nearly complete this recommendation and, as it involves amending written guidance and a form, that timescale does not seem excessive.
47. My view is that the Council has taken seriously the criticism raised about its previous s20 process and it has complied, within a reasonable timeframe, with the recommended improvements.

Complaint (b): review protocols and links between services for looked after children

48. I accept the Council’s finding of fault.
49. In August 2022, the new manager for the children in care teams introduced ‘team away days’, attended by various services, to improve coordination and relationships between teams. A representative of different teams also attends the children in care team meetings. There are also monthly meetings which focuses on children in care aged 17 plus, who do not have a clear plan for when 18. These meetings involve workers from the child in care team, the leaving care team, housing and education departments. And there is a similar multi-agency leaving care panel for those who need continued support post 18.
50. My view is that the Council is taking action to improve the liaison between services involved with children in care.

Complaint (c): ensure effective handovers between social workers and managers

51. The Council says that it is standard practice for there to be a handover between the social worker leaving, and the new one, along with their managers, and a joint visit wherever possible. When this is not possible, the Council says in these circumstances the manager will meet the new worker.
52. Clearly, this did not happen in this case, and the complaint was upheld by the Council, and I accept that finding. It is not possible for me to say whether the Council’s standard practice happens in all cases now. But the fact the Council accepted fault, it is hoped that the importance of a smooth handover is fully recognised.
53. Ms X considers that the Council should give a clear commitment to this.

Complaint (d): look at way the ‘red flags’ from the IRO were not responded to appropriately

54. The Council has investigated this. It seems that, because of social worker shortages, managers were holding caseloads and hence the Council says that this caused a delay in responding to the IRO’s concerns. Ms X says that the shortage of social workers was not the reason for the failure to respond to the concerns raised by the IRO. It was a case of professional incompetence by a senior manager.
55. IROs play a significant role in safeguarding looked after children’s best interests. In this case, the IRO constantly raised concern about the lack of action on agreed plans and assessments. I uphold this complaint.

Complaint (e): prepare a transition plan for Y to adulthood

56. The Council says that Y had an agreed transition plan for moving to adulthood, agreed in November 2022. However, when Y became 18, she remained in the semi-independent accommodation. This was so that Y had appropriate follow-on accommodation. The Council says that it has been difficult to find suitable accommodation. There has been some liaison with housing.
57. Ms X says that recently Y was told she would be evicted from her semi-independent accommodation, that she had to pack her bags on her own and, accompanied by her social worker, to present herself as homeless. Ms X says that the chances were she would have been placed in bed and breakfast accommodation inappropriately. Ms X says that Y contacted her directly, very upset and anxious. Ms X stepped in with Y’s agreement and found supported accommodation with a specialist provider, which the Council had failed to do so. Y was due to move in last month.
58. While this is a new event, and not part of Ms X’s original complaint, it is a concern that this should have happened especially when the Council had agreed to prepare a transition plan as part of the remedy for Ms X’s original complaint. My view is that this failure to have an appropriate transition plan is fault, and the Council’s failed commitment to ensure Y had such a plan will undermine Ms X’s trust in the Council to improve services for looked after children.

Complaint (f): consider Y’s interest in seeing her father

59. The Council says Y has not agreed for this to be discussed with Ms X. Ms X has provided more information. But I cannot comment further.

Complaint (g): look at why the escalation process did not work and send the Review Panel’s finding to the Director of Children Services

60. The Review Panel’s report has been sent to the Director. The Council says that in the past recruiting and retaining staff has been difficult and this is experienced by other councils.
61. The Council says that it has introduced a number of improvements, as follows:

• recruiting and retaining a new Operations Manager for the children in care team;
• employing a new Team Manager to increase management oversight, supervision and support to staff;
• introducing a new Lead Practitioner to keep experienced social workers in practice;
• implementing a career pathway for social workers to want to stay in practice.

62. The Council says that these changes have resulted in a more consistent, long-term workforce with less reliance on agency workers. In addition, the Council has looked at commissioning more placements for 16 plus looked after children resulting in new contracts with providers starting in August 2023. There is also closer working with housing to ensure appropriate placements. Ms X says that the Council should also be commissioning more specialist placements for young people with Y’s difficulties.

Back to top

Agreed action

63. I have no doubt that the Council is trying to address the problems, which have occurred in this case, by looking to improve some of the fundamental difficulties in retaining a consistent workforce and ensuring appropriate providers of accommodation and support. Ms X’s complaint raised important issues for looked after children which clearly needed addressing. The Council’s actions are too late to improve Y’s experience of the care system and it is to Ms X’s credit that she is not seeking a personal remedy but is seeking improvements for all looked after children.
64. However, it is a concern that Y was apparently asked to leave her accommodation at short notice, especially when the Council was committed to having a proper transition plan for Y.
65. With this in mind, the Council has agreed that, within one month of the final statement, the Council will provide:
1. a written explanation to Ms X and to the Ombudsman about why Y was asked to leave with so little notice, why there was no alternative suitable accommodation made available to her, why Ms X was able to find a specialist placement when the Council could not and what lessons the Council has learned from this event. Ms X has added further information which she would like the Council’s explanation to contain, (which I will provide to the Council in a separate letter):
2. evidence of the written escalation process for IROs to raise concerns, including the timescale for action when statutory review decisions are not being implemented; and
3. evidence that there is written guidance to ensure appropriate handovers are now being made between a previous and new social worker for looked after children.
66. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

67. My view is that there has been fault causing injustice, as identified and accepted by the Council, and the Council has made service improvements for looked after children. The Council has agreed further actions. Accordingly, I have completed my investigation and am closing the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman