The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council carried out child protection proceedings and says he could not properly contribute to the process. Mr X also says the Council wrongly refused to investigate his complaint about S47 reports compiled for the proceedings. We have found fault by the Council. However, this fault did not cause Mr X an injustice. We have made recommendations to remedy the fault identified.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the way the Council carried out child protection proceedings. He said: the Council rushed its child protection procedures, meaning he could not properly contribute to the process, including providing information to the Child Protection Conference; and social workers involved with the case displayed poor conduct and bias against him and his family.
Mr X also said the Council wrongly refused to investigate his complaint about S47 reports compiled for the proceedings. Mr X said this caused distress to him and his family. He is seeking an apology and service improvements.
What I have investigated I have investigated those parts of Mr X’s complaint about how the Council managed its child protection procedures and considered his complaint about the process. The final section of this statement sets out my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
Relevant legislation, guidance and policy Working Together to Safeguard Children (Working Together 2018) Working Together 2018 is statutory guidance for local authorities and other agencies. It sets out how these agencies should work together to assess children’s needs, and make arrangements for promoting and safeguarding their welfare. It sets out the principles, processes and timescales for carrying out child protection investigations.
Duty to make enquiries - Section 47 of the Children Act 1989 Section 47 of the Children’s Act 1989 (S47) places a duty on agencies, but mainly the local authority and the police, to make “such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether to take action to safeguard or promote the welfare of a child in their area”.
If the information gathered under section 47 supports concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm, the social worker will arrange an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC).
The Child Protection Conference (CPC) decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan. After the Initial Child Protection Conference, there will be one or more Review Child Protection Conferences. These will consider progress on the actions taken to safeguard the child and whether the Child Protection Plan should be maintained, amended, or discontinued.
Local child protection/safeguarding procedures complaints Each local authority will be covered by local child protection/safeguarding procedures, based on the Working Together 2018 guidance. These procedures may apply to a single local authority area, or to a group of authorities across a county or metropolitan area.
Although not required by law or the guidance, these procedures will usually include a procedure for managing complaints about Child Protection Conferences. The complaints procedure is for individuals unhappy with the conduct or outcome of a Child Protection Conference. This may include complaints about: the way the conference was run.
decisions about whether a child should have a Child Protection Plan.
decisions about the category of concern the Plan was made under, such as physical abuse or neglect.
Statutory children’s complaints procedure 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.
Social Work England The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether 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.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him.
I considered the Council’s responses to my enquiries.
Both Mr X and the Council were able to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
Background
In January 2022, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman about the way the Council conducted child protection proceedings involving him and his family. Mr X complained that: the Council had fabricated reports compiled as part of the S47 procedure. The ICPC later considered these reports in its decision-making.
social workers involved in the matter had displayed bias against him and his family.
the Council rushed the child protection proceedings, meaning Mr X could not properly contribute to the process. This included being unable to provide relevant information to the ICPC.
the Council wrongly refused to investigate a complaint about these matters.
In its response to my enquiries, the Council: said Mr X had raised concerns about enquiries made under S47 in December 2021. The Council said Mr X’s concerns were substantially similar to complaints he had made in the past.
said it had made the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) and relevant management aware of Mr X’s concerns, so they could be accounted for during the ICPC.
said it had not accepted a complaint about the S47 report because it believed the substance of the complaint it received did not fall within the remit of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
said it did not believe Mr X’s complaint met the criteria to be considered as a complaint about the conduct or outcome of the ICPC, under the local safeguarding procedures framework.
Analysis Timeframe for S47 enquiries and contribution to ICPC Mr X complained the Council had rushed its child protection procedures, denying him the opportunity to engage properly. Mr X told me the Council carried out S47 enquiries rapidly at the end of December 2021, without engaging with him or his family, and an ICPC was held shortly after in January 2022.
By their nature, S47 enquiries should be carried out as quickly as possible. Any resultant CPC should also be carried out promptly if information gathered through S47 enquiries confirms concerns for a child’s welfare.
Based on the evidence I have seen, I have not found the Council at fault for the speed at which it conducted the S47 enquiry process and arranged the resulting ICPC.
Mr X told the Council of his concerns about the content of the S47 reports and the conduct of social workers involved in the matter. In early January 2022, Mr X emailed the Council’s safeguarding unit directly, and I have seen evidence the Council passed this email to the IRO before the ICPC took place.
Mr X said the Council did not send him a copy of its assessment report before the ICPC took place, as it was required to, so that he could offer clarifications or objections. The Council has provided evidence it sent Mr X a copy of this report by email on the 4 January 2022, before the ICPC was held. The information I have seen shows Mr X replied to this by email, outlining his concerns in a separate document. Mr X attended the ICPC in person.
The evidence available suggests Mr X could make his concerns about the S47 enquiries known to the ICPC ahead of it taking any decisions, and I have not found fault by the Council.
Mr X said some professionals attending the ICPC were unaware of his concerns and he was not able to voice them directly. Given the S47 enquiries involved a joint-agency approach, and Mr X shared concerns with safeguarding professionals directly by email, I believe it likely the relevant professionals would have been aware of Mr X’s concerns.
Mr X says the ICPC took an incorrect decision. As outlined in paragraph 10, Mr X can complain about the outcome of a CPC by using the local child protection/safeguarding procedures complaints process.
Refusal to consider a complaint Mr X says the Council wrongly refused to investigate a complaint about this matter.
Mr X first raised concerns in late December 2021, sending further emails to the Council in the following weeks. In January 2022, the Council wrote to Mr X to say it could not consider a complaint about the content of an S47 report under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. It said it had shared Mr X’s concerns with the relevant professionals and IRO. The Council also said Mr X’s complaint was similar to others he had made in the past. It said it had addressed concerns about social worker conduct previously and it was satisfied there was no basis to change allocated workers at this time. It said it was important to preserve a sense of continuity for the children.
In March 2022, the Council wrote to Mr X again, following further exchanges of correspondence. The Council: clarified its understanding of Mr X’s concerns, saying he was unhappy with the S47 assessment and he believed inaccuracies in the report led to the decision to refer the matter to an ICPC.
referred to its previous correspondence about the matter. It said it was important Mr X had been able to share his views within the S47 enquiries, but it was not the role of the safeguarding unit to investigate complaints about S47 reports.
said it had shared the documents Mr X provided with the relevant senior officers and it was noted Mr X had also shared them with other professionals, such as the Police and safeguarding officials. The Council said it was satisfied the content of the S47 report was factually accurate.
advised Mr X to seek independent legal advice and advised him of his right to refer the matter to the Ombudsman.
The Council’s explanation to Mr X is consistent with what it told me in response to my enquiries.
The children’s statutory complaints procedure does not cover complaints about Section 47 matters. Some authorities may consider complaints about such matters under this procedure, however, where they are part of wider concerns.
Equally, the local safeguarding complaints procedures are for complaints about the conduct and/or outcome of a CPC. The Council said the complaint Mr X made was about the content of the reports, rather than the conduct or outcome of the CPC itself. It said it did not believe Mr X’s complaint could be considered under this procedure.
Having established these mechanisms were unsuitable, the Council told Mr X it would not consider a complaint about this matter. However, I can see no clear reason why the Council could not have considered Mr X’s complaint under its own corporate complaints procedure. I have found the Council at fault for failing to consider Mr X’s complaint in this way.
However, I do not believe the Council’s actions caused Mr X an injustice. This is because, while the Council did not formally accept Mr X’s complaint, it did issue responses confirming it had considered his views and shared them with the relevant officers. It considered the content of the S47 report and believed the details to be factually accurate. It also provided Mr X with a right of referral to the Ombudsman and suggested he may wish to take independent legal advice regarding his position. The Council did, in effect, consider the complaint and provide a substantive response, despite not doing so under the guise of a formal procedure.
The Council should, however, be aware it can consider such complaints under its own corporate complaints procedure in the future. Failure to do so might deny other individuals the right to have their complaints properly considered, which would not be in the public interest. It also means the Council is not properly monitoring complaints received by the organisation, and potentially missing out on valuable learning, or the need to put things right for individuals.
Agreed action
Within four weeks of the final decision being issued, the Council agreed to: remind relevant officers that complaints excluded from the remit of the statutory children’s complaint procedure, or the local safeguarding complaints procedures, can be considered under the Council’s corporate complaints procedure.
The Ombudsman received evidence the Council carried out this recommendation.
Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate I did not investigate the part of Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of social workers involved in this matter. This is because Mr X can raise his concerns about professional conduct with Social Work England.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault by the Council. This fault did not cause Mr X an injustice. I have made recommendations to the Council to address the fault identified.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman