Summary: Miss B complained about delay by the Council in dealing with her complaint about children’s services and delay in implementing the recommendations at all three stages of the complaints process. We found that the Council delayed unreasonably in considering the complaint and implementing the recommendations. The Council has agreed to pay Miss B £1000, consider training for all staff on the impact of domestic abuse and improve its procedures for the future.

The complaint

1. Miss B complained that Norfolk County Council (the Council) in respect of her complaint about children’s services:
• delayed in dealing with the complaint through the statutory three stage procedure;
• failed to implement the agreed actions and recommendations at each stage;
• failed to implement the suggestion by the Independent Person at stage two to ensure all workers have a thorough understanding of the impact of domestic abuse on families and children;
• failed to ensure a senior officer provided a sincere apology (as agreed at stage two) and took responsibility for the fault found;
• failed to provide any remedy financial or otherwise to Miss B to recognise the impact of the failings on her and her children.
2. These failures have caused Miss B and her children significant distress and have had a lasting impact on the family. She has also been put to significant time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, and the Council. I have also considered the guidance on the statutory children’s complaints procedure, the Ombudsman’s focus report ‘Are we getting the best from children’s social care complaints?’ published in March 2015 and guide for practitioners about the statutory complaints procedure published in March 2021. Miss B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share the final decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Statutory complaints procedure

7. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. At stage two of this procedure, the Council appoints an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person (who is responsible for overseeing the investigation). If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review. If a council has investigated something under this procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless he considers that investigation was flawed. However, he may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.
8. Stage one should be completed in a maximum of 20 working days, stage two in 65 working days and stage three within approximately 50 working days, in total 27 weeks.
9. During the COVID-19 pandemic the timescale for completing stage three was relaxed to allow councils to comply with the existing timeframes as soon as is reasonably practicable.

What happened

10. On 17 July 2020 Miss B made a formal complaint to the Council about the actions of children’s services in respect of her family. She said the Council had failed to protect her children from emotional abuse and parental alienation by their father, who had been a perpetrator of domestic abuse against Miss B . She said these failures had caused lasting emotional and mental health issues and had contributed to a breakdown in her relationship with the children.
11. The Council held two meetings with Miss B in October 2020 about the complaint and sent her a formal response on 21 October 2020. It apologised for the length of time it had taken to respond and agreed the following actions:
• a senior manager would audit the case.
• to reallocate the case to a new social worker who would carry out new assessment within 20 working days.
• to hold an Initial Child Protection Conference on 27 October 2020
• to provide additional support for one of the children and to put notes on another child’s case for urgent intervention if any new incidents arose.
• to get further information regarding therapy for one of the children.
12. Miss B had already contacted the Ombudsman about her complaint and in December 2020 she complained again to us saying she was dissatisfied with the Council’s response. On 18 December 2020 we asked the Council to do a stage two investigation.
13. The Council commenced an investigation into three complaints:
• Children’s Services failed to protect Miss B and her children, which had resulted in relationship breakdowns and one of the children not receiving the correct support for her education and emotional/mental well-being. Miss B also felt that domestic abuse support did not happen early enough and that at one point a strategy discussion was to be arranged which didn’t happen.
• There were inconsistent decisions made by different social workers concerning contact between the children and their father.
• Miss B was unhappy with how the stage one complaint was handled.
14. The Investigating Officer (IO) completed their report on 25 March 2021. They partially upheld the first complaint saying the case had been closed prematurely in November 2018, which meant the children missed out on significant support and interventions. The IO considered the children should have been on child protection plans at a much earlier point. However, they were unable to say categorically that this fault had directly affected the children’s behaviour. They did not uphold the second complaint but upheld the third into the stage one process.
15. They made several recommendations, including that:
• there is a full multi-agency case review of this case, organised by the Local Children’s Safeguarding Partnership.
• there should be a learning point that observation of contact between the children and the parent/carer of concern should always take place when recommendations are being made about risky contact.
• a formal apology be given to Miss B from a senior officer in relation to the delay in convening a Strategy Discussion.
• Miss B ’s request for individual work with two of the children and ultimately work with the family, should be offered.
16. The Independent Person (IP) endorsed the IO’s reports and added a suggestion that:

Children's Services ensure that all workers have a thorough understanding of the impact of domestic abuse on families, and a thorough knowledge of the potential effect of this on children so that appropriate intervention and support can be put in place at an early stage.

17. The Council sent its adjudication to Miss B on 25 April 2021. It agreed in full with the IO’s findings and recommendations but changed the first recommendation from ‘a multi-agency case review organised by the Local Children’s Safeguarding Partnership’ to ‘a full multi- agency discussion regarding this case, organised and led by Children’s Services’.
18. Miss B complained to us again and on 12 May 2021 we asked the Council to carry out a stage three panel. This took place on 19 August 2021. The panel partially upheld the first complaint but put a stronger emphasis on a link between the lack of social work intervention (between November 2018 and October 2020) and the deterioration in the children’s wellbeing. It upheld the other two complaints fully and expressed disappointment and concern that none of the stage two recommendations had been implemented. The Council sent its response to the stage three findings to Miss B on 31 August 2021. It agreed with them all and offered a sincere apology for the failure to implement the previous recommendations.
19. Miss B complained to us in September 2021. In response to my enquiries the Council said two independent workers have started the review and it will be completed by end of January 2022. Social workers are carrying out regular work with Miss B on an almost daily basis, including regular meetings and follow-ups. There is a high level of ongoing intervention. The Council has identified some therapeutic interventions which had started, and family therapy was due to start in December 2021. It had also sent another sincere apology to Miss B . It has also apologised for changing the wording of the recommendation at stage two (which it accepted changed the meaning of the action) and has reverted to carrying out a full case review. It also explained that the stage three panel was delayed due to the Chair requesting that the panel should take place in person. This was more difficult to arrange due to the pandemic restrictions.

Analysis

delayed in dealing with the complaint through the statutory three stage procedure

20. The Council took 13 weeks (rather than two) to send a stage one, almost 18 weeks (rather than 13) to complete stage two and 16 weeks (rather than ten) to complete stage three. In total the whole process took approximately four months longer than it should have done. I recognise that the COVID-19 restrictions contributed to the delay but I still think the majority of the delay at stages one and two was fault which caused Miss B frustration, distress and time and trouble.

failed to implement the agreed actions and recommendations at each stage

21. There is no evidence that the stage one audit of the case by a senior manager took place, or that additional support and interventions were provided to two of the children. No therapy was provided for the children until December 2021. This was fault. The Council failed to implement any of the recommendations of the stage two investigation until the stage three review panel had concluded over four months later. It also changed the recommendation of the IO without any explanation.
22. I accept that the Council has apologised for these delays, but the failures have caused significant frustration and distress to Miss B and further delayed efforts to improve the emotional and mental wellbeing of her children.

failed to implement the suggestion by the Independent Person at stage two to ensure all workers have a thorough understanding of the impact of domestic abuse on families and children

23. This suggestion was not picked up by the Council or the Review Panel. This was fault. It is important to Miss B for the Council to improve its recognition of the impact of domestic abuse on families and children. It has caused her further distress that this suggestion has not been followed up.

failed to ensure a senior officer provided a sincere apology (as agreed at stage two) and took responsibility for the fault found

24. The senior officer sent another letter of apology to Miss B in November 2021 and has been involved in implementing the remainder of the recommendations. I have not found fault here.

failed to provide any remedy financial or otherwise to Miss B to recognise the impact of the failings on her and her children.

25. Given the time taken to implement the recommendations made in October 2020 and April 2021 which should have provided direct support and interventions to Miss B and her children, I consider that a personal remedy is appropriate.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. In recognition of the injustice caused to Miss B and her children, I asked the Council within one month of the date of my final decision:
• to pay Miss B £1000 (£500 for her, £400 for the children and £100 for the delay in the complaints process);
• to produce an action plan with time-scales to ensure the stage three recommendations are fully implemented;
• to introduce a monitoring process at all stages of the complaints procedure to check that recommendations are fully implemented within the required timescales; and
• to consider implementing the suggestion of the IP to introduce training for all workers on the impact of domestic abuse on families and children and to discuss with Miss B the possibility of using her case for that training.
27. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I consider this is a proportionate way of putting right the injustice caused to Miss B and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman