Summary: Ms X complains on behalf of herself and her niece, Y, that the Council has failed to provide an adequate response to the findings and recommendations of their complaint investigated under the children’s social care complaints procedure. The complaint was about lack of support when Y ran away from home and came into Ms X’s care. The Council has agreed to increase the financial remedy it offered to Ms X and Y.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains on behalf of herself and her niece, Y, that the Council has failed to provide an adequate response to the findings and recommendations of their complaint investigated under the children’s social care complaints procedure. The complaint was about lack of support when Y ran away from home and came into Ms X’s care.

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 a council’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. The law sets out a three stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. At stage 2 of this procedure, the Council appoints an Independent Investigator and an Independent Person (who is responsible for overseeing the investigation). If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage 2 investigation, they can ask for a stage 3 review. If a council has investigated something under this procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless he considers the investigation was flawed. However, he may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I discussed the complaint with Ms X and considered the information she provided. Y provided written consent for Ms X to make the complaint on her behalf. I considered the complaint correspondence and the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries. Ms X, Y, and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
6. 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 this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I found

Duties towards children

7. Local authorities have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need by providing services appropriate to the child’s needs. (Children Act 1989, section 17)
8. Local authorities have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
9. These duties are set out in Statutory Guidance ‘Working together to safeguard children’. When a council children’s social care service receives a referral about a child who may be at risk of significant harm it must decide within one working day what type of response is needed. This will include determining whether:
• the child requires immediate protection and urgent action is required.
• the child is in need, and should be assessed under section 17 of the Children Act 1989;
• there is reasonable cause to suspect that the child is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm, and enquiries must be made and the child assessed under section 47 of the Children Act 1989;
• any services are required by the child and family and what type of services;
• further specialist assessments are required in order to help the authority to decide what further action to take;
• no further action is required.

Background

10. When E was a young child her mother became unable to care for her. The Council placed Y with her paternal grandmother, Ms G, and her father. Ms G took out a Residence Order for Y. In 2016 Children’s Social Care received two reports of physical aggression and threats against Y by her grandmother. In 2017 a family support worker from Children’s Social Care was helping the family, mainly by providing support for Ms G in managing Y’s behaviour.

Events from February 2018

11. In February 2018 when Y was aged 15, she ran away from home following an incident in which she said her grandmother made threats against her. When the police found Y and tried to return her to the home, her father would not take her back. The police took Y to the home of a friend of her father and grandmother.
12. The Council started a ‘Strengthening Families Assessment’. During the course of this assessment Y went to stay with a friend of Ms X. Then in April 2018 Y went to stay with Ms X and her family. As part of the Assessment the social worker (‘SW1’) spoke to Y, Ms X and Ms G. The Assessment noted that:
• Y had made allegations of physical and emotional abuse and threats of violence from her father and grandmother while she was living with them. She was scared of her father.
• When the police tried to return Y to the home in February 2018 her father was abusive towards her and the police felt the home was not a safe environment for her at the time.
• Ms G refused to allow the social worker to visit the family home or see other family members.
• Ms G had refused to let Y take her belongings from the house.
13. The conclusion of the Assessment was that:
• the relationship between Y and her grandmother had broken down
• there would need to be a private fostering assessment to look at whether Ms X could provide a suitable home for Y
• there was no further role for Children’s Services.
14. From April to August 2018, after the Assessment, SW1 visited Y at Ms X’s home three times. During this period there were some contacts between Ms X and the Council. She explained that she was struggling financially trying to support her own children and Y in overcrowded accommodation. The Council decided a private fostering assessment was not appropriate as this was for non-related carers, not family members. The Council had not been involved in placing Y with Ms X and so considered it had no responsibility to assess Ms X as a family and friends carer unless there were safeguarding concerns, which it felt there were not. The Council advised Ms X about claiming welfare benefits and gave her payment of £50 to help her buy clothes for Y. It also helped her apply for a transfer to larger accommodation.
15. In late September 2018 Y had a new allocated social worker, SW2. In discussion with SW2, Ms X and Y explained that Ms X was struggling financially and was unsure of her legal position in relation to caring for Y. Y explained she was worried about her father trying to remove her from Ms X’s care, but she now felt ready to make a statement to the police about the abuse she had experienced. As a result SW2 started another Strengthening Families Assessment in October. This resulted in a decision to place Y on a Child in Need Plan. SW2 also sent Ms X a copy of the previous assessment which she had had not received before. The Council also carried out a financial assessment of Ms X’s circumstances.
16. Also in October Ms X and Y made a complaint to the Council about lack of support during the previous six months. In response to the complaint the Council accepted it had not provided as much support as it could have done. It agreed to give Ms X a payment of £50 per week, to be reviewed in three months’ time, as a contribution towards the cost of caring for Y. It also reimbursed her £850 for the cost of items she had bought for Y over the previous six months and gave her some money to buy clothes for Y. It agreed to support a referral to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) for a psychological assessment and support, and to help progress Ms X’s housing application.

Statutory children’s social care complaint

17. Ms X and Y were not satisfied that the response had addressed all the matters they had raised and took the complaint to stages 2 and 3 of the children’s social care complaints procedure. By the end of the process all 17 parts of the complaint had been either fully or partially upheld. The key findings were that the Council:
• failed to carry out a full family assessment in February 2018 as it focussed too much on seeing Y as the problem and Ms G as the one needing support, and so failed to identify the risks to Y within the household;
• failed to take appropriate safeguarding measures when Y disclosed emotional and physical abuse at home and then exposed her to further risk by telling her grandmother about the disclosures;
• failed to take Y’s allegations seriously enough;
• did not visit Y often enough when she left home;
• did not provide enough help with the personal belongings Y had had to leave behind when she ran away from home;
• failed to carry out an assessment of Ms X as to whether she was suitable to care for Y. It was wrong for the Council to say it was a private fostering case as Y is a family member. Although there was no requirement to assess Ms X as a Family and Friends carer because it was a private arrangement, the Council should have done some sort of assessment;
• failed to hold a Family Network Meeting as recommended;
• failed to hold Child in Need meetings, issue a Child in Plan or send Ms X a copy of the first Strengthening Families Assessment until October 2018 when SW2 became involved;
• delayed in referring Y to CAMHS;
• provided an inadequate stage 1 complaint response.
18. Following the stage 2 report and recommendations the Council offered an apology to Y and offered Y and Ms X each £200 to recognise their time and trouble in pursuing the complaint. It also explained improvements made in the Council’s Child in Need processes. This included better management and oversight of cases and more frequent visits to children in need.
19. The Stage 3 Review Panel recommended an apology to Ms X and a more personalised apology to Y. It also recommended a review of the level of ‘compensation’ offered to take account of the impact of the Council’s failings in terms of distress, harm and risk, not just the time and effort involved in making the complaint. It suggested taking account of the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.
20. In its final response to the complaint the Council apologised to Ms X and agreed to send a separate apology to Y. It accepted the view of the Review Panel that it had not treated Y’s views and experience as central to the way it dealt with her case. It agreed to share the learning from the complaint with relevant sections of the Council. It offered Ms X and Y a further £200 each to reflect the impact of the failings identified at stage 2 and 3 of the complaint. It then offered Y a further £250 for her distress and anxiety, making £450 for this element of the remedy.

Analysis – is the remedy offered adequate?

21. There were serious failings on the part of the Council highlighted in the independent investigation of the complaint. As a result of these failings Y lacked adequate support and protection for 6 months. She was left feeling her own experience of abuse was not being taken seriously. She felt frightened her father and his family and would try and take her back. She could not retrieve or replace her possessions. For Ms X it meant that, despite the Council being aware of her difficult circumstances, it did not carry out any assessment, including a financial assessment for six months. So she was left without adequate financial support for looking after Y during that time. She was also uncertain about the legal position in relation to Y’s care and unaware of what support Y should have been receiving as a child in need.
22. Ms X was satisfied with the backdated financial support. However she was concerned to ensure the Council learned from the mistakes made in her case and was not satisfied it had put in place the necessary improvements.
23. The Council has explained the steps it has taken to improve its service to children in need and their families since the events in this complaint and following an Ofsted inspection. It has put in place a new strategy which includes:
• three weekly visiting to children in need
• regular meetings with other professionals
• a forum to share learning from cases
• better supervision and oversight of individual cases
• regular quality audits
• ensuring different family members have separate social workers where there is a disagreement between them
• closer working with advocacy services for children and young people.
24. Ms X recognises there have been positive developments. The Council says Ofsted was satisfied with the improvements made. I do not need to make further recommendations for service improvements as a result of this complaint.
25. My view is that £200 is a reasonable sum to offer each complainant to recognise their time and trouble in making their complaint. However I do not consider £200 for Ms X and £450 for Y sufficient to recognise the distress, anxiety and uncertainty they experienced. Nor does it do enough to recognise Y’s genuine fear that her grandmother or father would come and remove her from Ms X’s care. This was a realistic and significant risk of serious harm in my view, given that the paternal grandmother had a Residence Order for her. The lack of protective action exacerbated the risk and the fear. I recommend additional financial remedies below.

Agreed action

26. I recommended, and the Council has agreed, that in addition to the apologies and the sums already offered it will pay the following further sums to Y:
• £550 to recognise the emotional impact of the lack of help and support for six months, to make up the total payment for distress and anxiety to £1,000.
• £500 to recognise the significant risk of serious harm from potentially being removed Ms X’s care and the lack of protective action.
27. This brings the total payment to Y to £1,500 for the impact of the faults in addition to the £200 already offered for her time and trouble in pursuing her complaint. The Council should discuss with Y and her advocate ways of ensuring the payment is set aside for future use.
28. The Council has also agreed to offer Ms X a further £200 to recognise the distress, anxiety and uncertainty she experienced (making a total of £400 + £200 for her time and trouble).
29. These figures are based on the Ombudsman’s remedies guidelines.
30. If the Council has not provided the personal apology to Y recommended by the Stage 3 Review Panel it should write to her with the apology. If it has, it should send Y a copy of the letter.
31. The Council will take all the agreed action within one month of the final decision on this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have found that there was fault by the Council causing injustice, and that the remedy the Council offered previously was not sufficient. I am satisfied with the action the Council has now agreed to take and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman