Summary: We did not investigate Mrs X’s complaints about decisions the Council made about a child she fostered. This is because we did not find fault with the Council’s stage two and three statutory complaint investigations. However, we did find fault with delays in the Council’s complaint handling and in complying with the recommendations from those investigations. The Council has offered a suitable remedy for the delay. It will also complete the recommendations, apologise to Mrs X and remind officers of the timescales for carrying out investigations.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about decisions the Council made about a child she fostered. Mrs X said she felt bullied and harassed by the Council when she raised concerns about the child’s history. She did not feel listened to and said the Council dismissed her concerns for the safety of the child. She would like the Council admit mistakes were made and to apologise for the distress it caused.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated whether the complaint investigation carried out by the Council was flawed and whether the Council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

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. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether individual social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, Social Work England.
6. 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

7. I have considered the complaint made by Mrs X and the documents she provided.
8. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint in response to my enquiries and the documents it provided.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
10. 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

What I found

Law and guidance

11. The Children Act 1989 imposed a duty on councils to adopt a formal procedure to deal with complaints about children’s services. It is supported by the Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006.
12. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, Getting the Best from Complaints, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail. The guidance says who can complain and what they can complain about. This includes disputed decisions, concerns about the appropriateness of a service, and the attitude or behaviour of staff.
13. 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. The guidance says once a council has accepted a complaint at stage one, it must ensure the complaint continues to stages two and three if that is the complainant’s wish.
14. At stage two of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. If the complaint has been submitted orally, the council’s complaints manager must ensure the details of the complaint and the desired outcomes are recorded in writing and agreed with the complainant.
15. A stage two investigation should be completed within 25 working days of the complaint being received in writing, with the possibility to extend to 65 working days. A stage two investigation is complete once the investigation report, independent person’s report and the Council’s adjudication are sent to the complainant. 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.
16. 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.

Impact of COVID-19

17. On 23 March 2020, the government announced the first national lockdown and instructed people to stay at home other than in very limited circumstances.
18. On 24 April 2020, The Adoption and Children (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 came into force. Regulation 6 extended some deadlines relating to stage three reviews so that actions should be carried out “as soon as reasonably practicable”. The regulations ceased to have effect on 25 September 2020.

What happened

19. Mrs X and her husband fostered a child in 2019 before the child was placed with prospective adopters.
20. In November 2019 Mrs X complained to the Council about the way it moved the child to a new placement, and about the way it treated her and her husband. She also complained about decisions made about and support offered to the child. The complaint coincided with Mrs X and her husband resigning as foster carers.
21. The Council responded in December. It noted some decisions about the child had been made as part of court proceedings. The Council apologised that Mrs X had not been given more detailed information about the child and that she did not feel listened to or respected.
22. Mrs X remained dissatisfied and at the end of December 2019 asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two of the complaint procedure.
23. The Council said it would provide a further response to Mrs X’s complaints. When Mrs X asked about appointing an investigator and independent person and queried the timescale for response, the Council said:

“…a Stage 2 investigation would start being timed from when a Statement of Complaint is agreed between yourselves and the independent investigator. Contracts and paperwork would need to be issued and a meeting setup between yourselves and the Investigator and Independent Person, therefore realistically a Stage 2 investigation would not be completed within 5 weeks of a complainant requesting it. A more realistic timeframe would be 2 to 3 months.”

24. The Council sent further responses at the end of January. Mrs X remained dissatisfied, and the Council agreed to begin a stage two investigation in early February.
25. The Council appointed an investigator and independent person at the end of February. The investigator said he would meet with Mrs X to agree her statement of complaint. However, by the time the meeting was due to take place, the first national lockdown in response to COVID-19 had begun. The investigator held online meetings and telephone calls with Mrs X on five occasions. He sent the statement of complaint to the Council in August.
26. The investigator completed his report in December. In an appendix, the investigator listed the documents seen and the people interviewed as part of the investigation. This included:
• case notes
• sibling assessment
• meeting minutes
• council policies
• interviewing 13 members of staff.
27. The investigator noted the investigation and report had been delayed due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic which made it more difficult to identify convenient dates to interview people.
28. The investigator upheld one of Mrs X’s complaints, about delays in a social worker sharing information with her about the child’s prospective adopters. Twelve other complaints were not upheld. The investigator made the following recommendations to the Council:
• Consider how it shares confidential information securely but in a way that is accessible.
• All members of a team supporting a child should be able to attend looked after child review meetings and there should be flexibility in the timing of meetings to enable this.
• Consider reviewing how foster carers are supported and monitored.
• Review foster carer training.
• Provide details of the steps taken since the most recent Ofsted inspection of the Council’s fostering service.
29. The independent person also completed her report in December and confirmed the investigation had been carried out in an “open, transparent and fair way.” The independent person explained that due to difficulties presented by COVID-19 restrictions, all interviews took place online or over the telephone. She noted the investigation had taken longer than it should due to the pandemic, difficulties securing interviews with past employees, and the investigator being on holiday. However, she noted the investigator had kept Mrs X advised at all stages of the complaint. She supported the investigator’s findings.
30. The Council sent the investigator’s report, independent person’s report and its adjudication on the complaint to Mrs X at the end of January 2021. In its adjudication the Council accepted the investigator’s recommendations. It said:
• where people had difficulty accessing its system for sharing confidential information, it would send password-protected documents instead;
• its ambition was for all individuals significantly involved in children’s lives to attend reviews or to be consulted where this was not possible;
• it had appointed a ‘stability lead’ to work with foster carers and practitioners;
• it would review its training offer for foster carers; and
• it had a development plan focused on the recommendations from its previous inspection.
31. In February, Mrs X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage three. She also asked for a meeting with the director of children’s social care. The Council arranged a remote review panel meeting which took place towards the end of March. The panel considered the investigator and independent person’s reports and Mrs X’s original complaint and requests for stage two and three. The panel also considered an annotated copy of the investigator’s report incorporating Mrs X’s views on his findings.
32. Following discussion with Mrs X, the panel considered six of the twelve complaints which had not been upheld. In addition, the panel considered a new concern from Mrs X that the Council had provided a reference to a fostering agency which said she and her husband had been deregistered, rather than had resigned.
33. The panel did not overturn any of the findings from the stage two investigation. During the review panel discussions, the investigator acknowledged the stage two investigation had taken too long. The panel recommended that:
• Mrs X accept the Council’s offer to meet to hear about improvements made since the Ofsted review;
• the Council consider how foster carers are made aware of how decisions are made about children in their care and how their views will be considered;
• the Council provide Mrs X with a copy of the reference it gave to her new fostering agency;
• any update to the child’s life story provided by Mrs X be included in their life story book; and
• the complaints team monitor the progress of complaints and make complainants aware of timescales.
34. The Council wrote to Mrs X in April. It invited her to contact officers to arrange a meeting and said it would share a copy of the reference with her. The Council said it would work with foster carers and independent reviewing officers to ensure foster carers understood how decisions about looked after children were made. It told Mrs X any information she shared for the child’s life story book would be included. It acknowledged it should have monitored the progress of the stage two investigation more closely.
35. In response to my enquiries the Council provided an update about its progress with the recommendations. It said:
• its independent reviewing officers have introduced increased flexibility in looked after child review meetings to ensure those significantly involved with a child can attend;
• it has carried out service improvements following an independent review of the fostering service, including reorganising teams and creating an extra team within the service;
• it has recruited stability workers to support placements and is part of a programme funded by the Department for Education to promote the stability of foster placements; and
• it has also recruited new training officers within the fostering service and has a comprehensive training programme available to foster carers.

These improvements were carried out with foster carers and are overseen by a development board chaired by the director of children’s social care.

36. The Council said Mrs X met with a head of service and service manager in July 2021. It said the officers provided an update on the improvements made within the fostering service. It said it had sent Mrs X a copy of her reference and Mrs X provided life story information which it shared with the child’s adopters. In response to my enquiries about delay, the Council offered to pay £250 to Mrs X to recognise the time the complaint investigation took.
37. Mrs X says she did not receive a copy of her reference from the Council. The Council told me it believed a service manager, who has since left the Council, had sent it. However, as the Council cannot evidence the document was sent, it accepts the manager may not have done so.
38. Mrs X sent me information from the fostering agency she now works with which said the Council had noted Mrs X and her husband were de-registered as foster carers. The same document says the current agency had confirmed this was not the case by reviewing files held by the Council.
39. The Council sent me a copy of the reference it sent to Mrs X’s new fostering agency. The reference was completed on a template provided by the new agency. Under the heading ‘Please give the current approval status of the carers’ it says ‘Deregistered’ and ‘Resigned’. The Council says both words were on the template when it was provided by the new agency. Under ‘Resigned’, the Council wrote ‘Took effect on 16/12/2019’.

Analysis

40. My role is to examine whether the Council properly investigated the complaint using the three-stage statutory complaint process. If I find it has not, it is open to me to look at the decision itself. If it has properly completed the investigation, then I may consider if the remedy offered will address the injustice arising from the faults found.
41. Mrs X asked for a stage two investigation in late December, in writing. Therefore the 25-working day timescale for completing the stage two investigation started on that day. Neither the regulations nor the guidance allows the start of the investigation to be delayed to appoint an investigator and independent person – these actions need to be accounted for within the 25 working days. As the complaint was already in writing, there was no need for a further statement of complaint to be agreed. The Council misrepresented the process to Mrs X, and this was fault.
42. In any case, the statement of complaint signed in August 2020 was the same as the stage two complaint submitted by Mrs X in December 2019. The Council caused unnecessary delay by seeking a new statement of complaint.
43. The Council took more than a year from Mrs X seeking a stage two investigation to complete the process. There were also delays in the stage three process. This was fault. I consider the £250 the Council has proposed to pay Mrs X to be a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by this delay.
44. The investigator’s report at stage two shows he considered a range of information, including that provided by Mrs X, and interviewed several officers including those who had left the Council and those who worked for other bodies involved in the case. The investigation was subject to scrutiny by the independent person which did not highlight any concerns about the investigator’s practice.
45. Mrs X had an opportunity to have her complaint considered by an independent panel which made further recommendations. Mrs X feels the panel’s report does not accurately reflect her and her husband’s contributions to the review. However, the report says it is a summary of the discussion and findings, rather than a word-for-word account. I do not consider the comments added by Mrs X undermine the panel’s decision making. I have not found fault in how the panel reached its conclusions. Where a decision has been properly made, I cannot question the merits of that decision. Therefore, I do not intend to look further at the complaints Mrs X made to the Council.
46. I am satisfied the Council complied with most of the recommendations made at stage two and three of the complaint procedure. However, it cannot evidence it sent the reference to Mrs X as recommended, which is fault, and this has caused Mrs X frustration. I have made recommendations below to address this.
47. In respect of the reference to Mrs X’s new fostering agency, the Council recorded that Mrs X and her husband had resigned. The new fostering agency reviewed the Council’s records and found they had resigned. Mrs X and her husband are now fostering for the new fostering agency. Therefore, there is no injustice to Mrs X.

Back to top

Agreed action

48. The Council has already offered to pay Mrs X £250 to recognise the delay in the statutory complaint process. In addition, the Council has agreed to the following:
• Within one week of this decision, it will send Mrs X a copy of her reference and apologise that this was not done sooner.
• Within one month of this decision, it will remind staff dealing with complaints the timescale for completing a stage two investigation begins once a complainant requests it in writing.
• Within one month of the final decision, it will review its systems for monitoring compliance with recommendations from stage two investigations and stage three review panels to ensure these are completed in a timely way.

Back to top

Final decision

49. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault for the reasons explained in this statement. Mrs X has been caused an injustice by the actions of the Council and it has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

50. I did not investigate those parts of Mrs X’s complaint the Council did not uphold during its original investigation. We only investigate complaints where we find significant fault in the conduct of the statutory complaints procedure, which does not apply to this complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman