Summary: The Council failed to adhere to the timescales agreed with the Ombudsman over completing a service improvement recommendation from a previous case; this was fault. The Council agreed to complete a review of why these delays occurred and to advise what it intends to do to prevent a reoccurrence.

The complaint

1. The Ombudsman opened a new complaint following the Council’s delays in completing the agreed service improvement recommendation from a previous complaint, reference 23006293.
2. The previous complaint was about the Council’s failure to provide full-time education for a child.

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 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 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed the documents on the previous complaint, reference 23006293 and considered the Ombudsman’s guidance.

Back to top

What I found

Background

7. As part of the recommendations agreed by the Council for conclusion of complaint reference 23006293, the Council agreed a to a service improvement. This service important was for the Council to review its record keeping policies and provide guidance and training to staff about the importance of accurate record keeping including recording details to support its rationale behind its decision making. The Council agreed to take this action within three months of the Ombudsman’s final decision, made on 14 June 2024.
8. The Council’s deadline for completion of the service improvement recommendations was 14 September 2024. We contacted the Council on 13 September 2024, 3 October 2024 and 15 October 2024 to request evidence of the service improvement recommendation implementation.
9. On 29 October 2024, we advised we would open a new case on 5 November 2024 to investigate non-compliance with the recommendations if the Council does not provide evidence before this date.
10. On 21 November 2024, the Council provided evidence of compliance with the service improvement recommendation.

Findings

11. The Council has now provided evidence to show implementation of all aspects of the recommendations in the previous case.
12. The delay completing the service improvement recommendation amounted to over two months beyond the agreed timescale; this was fault. A failure to meet the agreed recommendation implementation timescales undermines a complainant’s confidence that lessons have been learnt following service improvements.
13. The Council should complete a review of why there were delays in carrying out the agreed on service improvement recommendations and advise what actions it intends to take to prevent future reoccurrences.

Back to top

Agreed action

14. Within two months of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Council should:
• Complete a review of why there were delays in carrying out the agreed on service improvement recommendations and advise what actions it intends to take to prevent future reoccurrences.
15. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Council accepted my recommendation, so I have completed my investigation as I consider that a suitable remedy.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman