Summary: The complainant (Mr X) said the Council failed to amend the social care assessments carried out for his two children (M and N). We found fault with the Council for not considering Mr X’s complaint through its children’s statutory complaint procedure. This fault did not cause Mr X injustice as the Council upheld his complaint during the corporate complaint process. The Council has already offered to carry out a reassessment of M’s and N’s needs but it has now agreed to complete some extra remedies.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council failed to amend the social care assessments carried out for his two children. Because of the Council’s failings, Mr X says, M and N missed out on the provision they should have been receiving. Mr X says he spent much time and effort contacting the Council, often not receiving any response. His wife could not return to work.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
7. I considered the information and documents provided by the Council.
8. I referred to our guide for practitioners “Children’s statutory complaints process” updated in November 2023.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Children’s statutory complaints

10. The guidance ‘Getting the best from complaints’ Social Care Complaints and Representations for Children, Young People and Others (Guidance) is based on the Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006. Only in exceptional circumstances councils can justify a variation from this document.
11. The Guidance specifies:
• which complaints should be considered under children’s statutory complaints procedure;
• who can complain;
• process and timescales for considering complaints.
12. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services:
• The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond;
• If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request;
• If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The council must hold the panel within 30 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
13. The statutory guidance “Getting the best from complaints” sets out that all functions of the local authority under Part 3 of the Children Act 1989 children’s social care functions should be considered under the procedure. A complaint may arise as a result of many things relating to statutory social services functions such as assessments and application of eligibility criteria.

Children in need

14. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 says councils must safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need.
15. A child is in need if:

• they are unlikely to achieve or maintain a reasonable standard of health or development unless the council provides support;
• their health or development is likely to be significantly impaired unless the council provides support; or
• they are disabled.

16. Under the Children Act 1989, councils are required to provide services for children in need for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting their welfare. Where a referral is accepted under section 17 the council should lead a multi-agency assessment and compete it within 45 working days. Where the council’s children’s social care decides to provide services, it should develop a multiagency child in need plan which sets out which organisations and agencies will provide which services to the child and family. The plan must be reviewed within three months of the start of the child in need plan and further reviews should take place at least every six months thereafter. (Working Together to Safeguard Children) 
17. When a council assesses a child as being in need, it supports them through a child in need plan. This should set clear, measurable outcomes for the child and expectations for their parent. Councils should review child in need plans regularly.

What happened

M’s social care assessment

18. During the appeal against M’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan the Council agreed to carry out a social care assessment for them. The Council completed M’s child and family assessment at the beginning of April 2023. The social worker assessing M identified M needed support but decided direct payments for respite sought by M’s parents would not be right. The Council noted it had offered support to M’s parents but they had declined it. M’s parents consistently said no support was offered.
19. Four days after receiving M’s assessment Mr X asked for it to be reviewed and updated. Mr X sent a list of errors. Mr X also queried the Council’s refusal to offer support his parents asked for M.
20. The Council amended some errors but failed to address all Mr X’s concerns.

N’s social care assessment

21. In March 2023 the children services received a referral for N. The Council completed N’s child and family assessment in May 2023. The social worker assessing N noted he lacked motivation and refused to engage with the support offered. In his comments to my draft decision Mr X said the Council did not offer any support to N. N’s parents engaged with parenting course. The social worker decided early help support would be the best option for N but his parents wanted direct payments for a personal assistant.

Complaint

22. In mid-November 2023 Mr X complained about M’s and N’s child and family assessments. Besides many errors Mr X queried the fact the Council identified eligible needs for both of his children but did not offer suitable support.
23. Having received no response Mr X contacted the Council again a month later. Mr X expressed his dissatisfaction with the Council’s lack of engagement and said he hoped to avoid the need to progress to stage two independent investigation and stage three carried out by the independent review panel.
24. Mr X chased the Council again in mid-January 2024.
25. At the beginning of March 2024 Mr X brought his complaint to us. He said the Council failed to respond to his correspondence about social care assessments for his children.
26. The next day after receiving correspondence from us the Council provided Mr X with its stage one response. The team manager apologised for the delay in the Council’s complaint handling and confirmed the Council would follow its corporate complaints procedure when investigating Mr X’s complaint. The Council said it had reviewed and amended M’s assessment following the receipt of Mr X’s concerns. The only correspondence it had received about N’s assessment was N’s mother’s (Mrs X) agreement to the child and family well-being support.
27. Mr X did not consider the Council had addressed his concerns and a few days after receiving the Council’s response asked the Council to progress his complaint to stage two.
28. In its stage two response issued at the end of May 2024 the Council:
• Upheld Mr X’s complaint about the lack of communication from M’s and N’s social worker about amendments to the children’s assessments.
• Explained the Council misunderstood Mr X’s position. The Council assumed Mr X was satisfied with its review of M’s assessment as for a long time he did not raise any further concerns.
• Only after closer look at Mr X’s correspondence the Council realised Mr X queried also the outcomes of both assessments. To consider a different outcome the Council would need to re-assess Mr X’s children. The Council offered a reassessment, which needed Mr X’s and Mrs X’s consent.
• Recognised it was wrong not to offer support for M and N due to concerns that they would not engage with it. The Council also accepted that because it had identified M’s and N’s needs, it should have ensured the support to meet them.
• Apologised for the delays at both stages in responding to Mr X’s complaint.
29. Mr X told me he was concerned about the negative impact a reassessment might have on his children. He said the assessments carried out in the spring and early summer of 2023 were upsetting for M and N. He would accept a reassessment of M’s and N’s social care needs provided the children’s contact with any professionals was minimised. Mr X also said he had found it difficult to communicate with the Council’s children social care team and it would help to have a direct contact to a member of staff.

Analysis

30. As explained in paragraph three of this decision we would not look into the merits of the Council’s decision provided it has followed the correct process.
31. The Council failed to consider Mr X’s complaint in accordance with the children’s statutory complaint procedure even though Mr X was raising concerns about the outcomes of M’s and N’s assessments. When deciding on the complaint procedure to use when parents query the Council’s services delivered under Part 3 of the Children Act 1989 councils should apply the test explained in our “Guide for practitioners: Children’s statutory complaints process”.
32. The Council’s failing is fault. It did not however cause injustice to Mr X as the Council upheld his complaint during the corporate complaint procedure. The Council admitted it had failed by not offering suitable provision to M and N and offered to carry out reassessments for them.
33. The Council accepted it had failed to comply with its duties when carrying out the assessment process for M and N. Because of the Council’s failings M and N missed the provision they should have had. Mr X was increasing distressed at this situation and many times contacted the Council seeking resolution.
34. I consider the remedy suggested by the Council is not enough to remedy Mr X’s injustice and the injustice caused to M and N.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council within four weeks of my final decision complete the following:
• Start social care reassessments for M and N to identify their needs and provision required. The Council will liaise with Mr X to minimalise any negative impact of extra assessments on his children;
• Improve the social care team’s communication with Mr X by providing him with contact details of an individual member of staff;
• Pay Mr X £300 for each child to recognise the lack of right social care provision following the assessment of M’s and N’s needs. The Council will pay £600 in total;
• Pay Mr X £150 for extra time and trouble spent to pursue his complaint because of the Council’s failings.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

36. The Council will also within three months of my final decision remind its staff dealing with the children’s services complaints that complaints about assessments carried out in the discharge of the Council’s duties under part three of the Children Act 1989 should be considered through the children’s statutory complaint process.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I uphold this complaint. I found fault which caused injustice to Mr X and his children. The Council has accepted my recommendations, so this investigation is at an end.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman