The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We found fault by the Council on Mrs D’s complaint about how she was dealt with following allegations from her foster child. Concerns were not consistently raised with her, a serious allegation was not properly dealt with, there was a failure to follow procedures, and she was not given information about key developments with the investigation or given clear information about procedures. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.
The complaint
Mrs D, as a registered foster carer, complains about the way the Council dealt with allegations made by her foster child and its failure to: raise concerns with her throughout his stay about her care of the child until its investigation of the allegations; deal with her reports of unprofessional conduct by staff which included inappropriate comments against her; tell her about an allegation that she made a racial comment; follow its own procedure; address the needs of the child after he left her care; tell her of the risks he posed to himself and to others; and reimburse her the cost of a cruise she paid for when it was aware the child would not return to her.
As a result, she was caused a great deal of stress, upset, and depression which has affected her health as well as causing her a financial loss.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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) When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
Allegations against Foster carers The National Fostering Minimum Standards says investigations into allegations against carers should be carried out quickly and should provide protection to the child but, also support to the person subject to the investigation. Foster carers should be told in writing about any allegations against them and given information about the timescale for completing the investigation. They should also be told about the payment of allowance and any fee while investigations are continuing.
A council shall not allow the placement of a child with a particular person to continue if it appears to them that the placement is no longer the most suitable way of performing their duty. Where it appears to an authority that to continue a placement would be harmful to the welfare of the child concerned, the council shall remove the child.
Part 5 of the 2011 Fostering Services Regulations provides for the assessment of foster carers. A council must carry out an assessment which is referred to a Fostering Panel. A Panel can only make a recommendation as to whether the person is suitable.
The Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) is a person responsible for managing and overseeing investigations into allegations that somebody who works with children has behaved in a way that may pose a risk to children.
The fostering minimum standards say, “Allegations against people that work with children or members of the fostering household are reported by the fostering service to the LADO. This includes allegations that on the face of it may appear relatively insignificant or that have also been reported directly to the police or Children and Family Services.”
One of the standards for fostering services is to “ensure that a clear distinction is made between investigation into allegations of harm and discussions over standards of care. Investigations which find no evidence of harm should not become procedures looking into poor standards of care - these should be treated separately.”
It will be a matter of professional judgement for the social worker, based on their knowledge of the child and carer, that the child’s welfare is not being adequately safeguarded. Children cannot always describe unhappiness so understanding what the child’s daily life in the placement is like; routine, mealtimes and whether the foster child is treated the same way as the birth children, is key to understanding what may be having a negative impact on the child.
What I have and have not investigated I have not investigated any complaint about: the child failing to have any education; him missing medical appointments; not providing him with his belongings for 6 months; complaint e); and complaint f).
This is because these were all events that took place after the child left her care and returned to the Council’s care. I consider he would need to make a complaint to us on his own behalf, probably with some help and support, about these failings.
In addition, complaint f) is a late complaint. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended). As she contacted us in October 2023, we would usually only look at events from October 2022. On balance, I consider she would have been aware of this failing well before October 2022.
The private Foster Care Agency is within our jurisdiction because it is performing an administrative function of the Council.
How I considered this complaint
I considered all the information Mrs D sent, the notes I made of our telephone conversation, and the Council’s response to my enquiries. I have also seen a copy of the stage 2 complaint investigation report provided by the Foster Care Agency and its internal report. I saw a copy of Mrs D’s request to rectify the Agency’s internal report. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Mrs D and the Council. I considered their responses.
What I found
In 2016, Mrs D and her partner began fostering an 11-year-old boy, E, who stayed with them for almost seven years. This placement was arranged through a Foster Care Agency (the Agency). The Agency was a private organisation which recruited, trained, and supported foster carers. Foster carers can register with either a local authority or an independent fostering agency like the Agency. Local authorities are responsible for safeguarding all looked after children, including foster children.
In June 2022, a social worker received an email from E which claimed Mrs D and her partner had verbally and physically abused him for some time. He sent a copy to Mrs D. The email referred to abuse, how he felt, and how he wanted to move.
Mrs D sent the Council a copy of this email, disputing what E had said and told the Council she wanted the placement to end immediately. A social worker visited him, and E said he felt safe to spend the night there. The Agency contacted the Council who asked the social worker to help move E during the investigation of the allegations.
E was removed from Mrs D’s home and placed with alternative foster carers. The Agency sent her an email confirming there would be an investigation of the allegations.
The Agency carried out its own internal investigation into the allegations, a copy of which I have seen (internal report). I have also seen a copy of its stage 2 complaint investigation report (complaint report). This upheld, partially or fully, several parts of Mrs D’s complaint.
Mrs D was unhappy with the internal investigation and the way she was dealt with by the Council and the Agency.
The complaint report made 11 recommendations which included: a full apology from the Agency for complaints upheld; details of learning and changes made; a consideration of the request for reimbursement of the holiday; Mrs D’s views on emotional abuse claimed are obtained and reflected on before passing to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).
I now consider her complaints: Complaint a): failing to raise concerns during his stay about her care until its investigation of the allegation Mrs D was unhappy concerns were referred to in the internal report and the complaint report despite no concerns being raised by the Council or the Agency during the seven years they fostered E.
She gave the example of the Agency’s internal report containing information which had never been previously raised or investigated and so were unproven. This included references to her having said E was ‘lazy’, for example, and other references to language used in carer logs she completed. She pointed out these few references needed to be taken into context as they were out of more than 800 recordings made.
The Council confirmed until June 2022, E had not raised any significant concerns about his care with her. It could not respond to her claim about what might have been said in the 2023 meeting as E was no longer in her care.
During E’s stay with Mrs D, a social worker would provide feedback during the annual review process which included what she could do differently. The Council assumed the Agency would have shared these comments with her.
I have seen minutes for a review that took place in October 2021. These show the social worker recorded the quality of care provided by Mrs D was ‘met to a good standard’. In areas for development, the review recorded sharing E’s views, thoughts, and feelings more.
The Agency confirmed the internal report noted: concerns with language used when making entries in their logs; Mrs D asking a social worker to reprimand E after she had already dealt with the issue; her speaking negatively about E while he was at home, although this was raised during a meeting; and evidence the social worker sent logs back to Mrs D in 2017 due to negative and inappropriate terms used. Mrs D agreed to amend them. A suggested meeting to share these concerns with the Council did not happen.
The complaint report referred to the internal report, and noted: there was an acceptance by the social worker at the Agency that there was a lack of robust challenge at times with Mrs D and they were not always given support; and the Agency internal report said Mrs D had not been given full opportunities to raise their standards as concerns were not consistently raised with them.
My findings
I found fault on this complaint. This is because there is no evidence Mrs D was consistently made aware of concerns while E was in her care at the time they arose. This would have allowed her to reply to the concerns and, where appropriate, change to resolve them.
I consider the fault caused Mrs D an injustice. This is because she lost the opportunity to respond to concerns as they arose and had the frustration of seeing them for the first time in the internal report. It also caused her stress.
Complaint b): deal with her reports of unprofessional conduct Mrs D complains a social worker told E, after his removal from her care, that she had made many complaints against him and had merely ‘baby sat’ him for the previous seven years which she found insulting. The social worker is also claimed to have said during this period, Mrs D had not cared for him and that he had not done anything for himself.
These comments were apparently made at a meeting in 2023 when E was no longer in her care.
The Council confirmed it could not comment on matters which took place after E left her care.
My findings
I found no fault causing Mrs D an injustice. Even if they had been said, E was no longer in her care at this point and Mrs D was not present to directly hear them.
Complaint c): tell her about an allegation that she made a racial comment; Mrs D believes this allegation originated at a review held at her house. She only found out about the allegation eight months after the meeting when the Agency’s internal investigation started. Nothing was said to her at the time of the meeting and nor did two people present, both black, raise any complaint at the time.
She claimed the Agency spoke to its staff present at the meeting who said they had not heard the alleged comment. She disputed the internal report’s claim there had been no time to raise it with her after the meeting. Mrs D stated the social worker stayed behind and had a cup of tea with her after it and could have raised it then. She also stated nothing about the alleged comment was recorded in the minutes of the meeting either.
In its response to her formal complaint, the Council said the social worker raised a concern about the comment at the time, but perhaps not robustly enough. The comments were not included in the minutes because the social worker claimed E could have read them as this was his meeting. The social worker has since been on reflective learning discussions about challenging anti-racist practice.
The Agency noted the internal report said the Council social worker thought the comments were a one-off but could not be clear whether this had been raised with Mrs D or the Agency.
The Agency spoke to its social worker who was present at the meeting. The social worker could not recall any such comment and would have challenged it being black himself. The Agency spoke to the Council’s social worker and the independent reviewing officer about why they did not challenge what was allegedly said. In the Agency’s opinion, their responses were very poor and not in line with addressing equality and diversity issues.
The Council confirmed its social worker, and the independent reviewing officer who chaired this meeting, attended ‘reflective learning discussions’ about challenging anti-racist practice with their managers.
My findings
I found fault on this complaint. There is no written record of Mrs D making any possible racist comment at the meeting. There is nothing to show this was raised at the time with her. The Agency’s own social worker could not recall any such comment and said he would have challenged it at the time if he had.
I am satisfied there was a failure to properly document and record this allegation at the time it happened. The failure to do so amounts to fault.
I am satisfied this caused Mrs D an injustice. This is because she lost the opportunity to respond to the allegation at the time. She also had the frustration of reading about this for the first-time months later.
Complaint d): follow its own procedure; Mrs D claimed the Agency failed to follow its own procedures generally and when investigating the allegation against her. She gave the example of the alleged racist comment which should have been properly investigated at the time.
The Agency’s complaint report noted: there was a failure to tell Mrs D during a telephone call about an arranged meeting the social worker had with the LADO the following day. This meant she was not given timely updates.
there was a failure to tell Mrs D about an allegation of emotional abuse which the LADO would consider. It was not made clear to her that the LADO process was still considering her for emotional abuse. It shocked her when later told this allegation had been substantiated and she was now seen as a risk under the category of emotional abuse.
there was a failure to provide the LADO with Mrs D’s views on the emotion abuse allegations and additional concerns raised through the Agency’s internal investigation.
there was evidence of Mrs D not signing all supervision notes as being accurate. This process was unmonitored.
there was a failure to give her information about the procedure to be followed by the Agency about the allegation.
she was not given specific details about how and when she would be kept informed about progress on the investigation both verbally and in writing.
there was a failure by the independent investigator to have a further discussion with Mrs D about the racist comment claim to include her version of events in the report.
the report did not record Mrs D contesting a claim E made about her saying he should tell the police the allegation was a mistake and he wanted to move back.
My findings
I found fault on this complaint. This is because there were failings in the process both before and during the investigation of the allegation made against her. She was not kept updated about key process developments, not told about a separate emotional abuse allegation the LADO was investigating, and nor was she given the chance to have her views on the allegation presented to the LADO for consideration. She was also denied the chance to have her response to the racist claim included in the internal report.
There were also failures in the general procedures such as not ensuring she had signed supervision notes to show her agreement.
I am satisfied the fault found caused her an injustice. She lost the opportunity to know what was happening at key points, had the shock of hearing about an emotional abuse allegation being upheld by the LADO, and denied the chance to put her views forward in response to allegations and have them recorded.
Complaint g): reimburse her the cost of a cruise In March 2022, Mrs D asked a social worker about taking E abroad for a holiday in December. She claimed she was told she could. The social worker got E’s passport renewed. Mrs D paid £1,200 for him to join them on a holiday.
The Agency confirmed Mrs D mentioned a holiday in May, but there were no details. As far as the Agency knew, this was the holiday they mentioned but E’s passport did not arrive in time for him to go with them. This was not the cruise holiday.
In June, E was removed from her care in response to his allegations. The Council told her it was not possible to say if E could go on the cruise she had booked until after the conclusion of the investigation.
The Agency became aware through the LADO in September that E would not be returning to their care. Mrs D was told of the decision the same day. It said it was only at this point it became aware for the first time they had booked a cruise for December.
I have seen a copy of Mrs D’s email to the Agency and the Council which asked whether E would join them on the cruise. The Agency reply said it was not possible to say whether E would join them on the cruise, and it could not do so until the investigation was concluded. The Agency was waiting for the police to finish its investigation.
The Council explained consent was needed both from it and the Agency. Both needed to consider E’s needs and carry out a risk assessment. The Council denied giving consent for E to go on this trip. It also said the social worker might have said he could do so before the allegation was made but could not recall. It explained it ensures all children in care have passports, mainly for identification reasons for when they become independent.
My findings
I found no fault on this complaint. This is because while the Council may have agreed to Mrs D taking E on holiday in 2022 before the allegation, the situation changed in June when it was made. This is because E had made allegations which needed investigating.
It was a sensible approach to withhold consent until the outcomes of the ongoing investigation and police investigation were known. In addition, I note the Agency told Mrs D about the decision not to return E to their care in September. This should have alerted her to the fact it was extremely unlikely she would be given consent to take him when he was no longer in her care. He was no longer in her care because of his allegations and his stated wish to move.
Agreed action
I considered our guidance on remedies.
I also considered the recommendations made at stage 2 of the complaints procedure followed by the Agency. These included: the sending of a written apology for those complaints upheld wholly or in part; details of changes made as a result of the complaint; it consider the reimbursement request for the cruise; the internal investigation report to fully reflect her views about emotional abuse allegations to be sent to the LADO before consideration by its fostering panel; clear written information is always given to foster carers about the investigation process which is consistent with policy and guidance; clear written information is given about the internal investigation process to foster carers; internal investigators should always ensure foster carers have the chance to reply to issues raised which is then included in the report; supervision agreements are revised to ensure foster carers sign to show agreement with what was discussed; checks are in places to ensure supervision records are signed by them; annual reviews after substantiated allegations are held in person, face to face.
The Council agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the final decision: Pay Mrs D £450 for the injustice caused by the identified faults.
Confirm the recommendations in the complaint report were carried out.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Final decision
I found the following on Mrs D’s complaint about the Council: Complaint a): fault and injustice; Complaint b): no fault causing injustice; Complaint c): fault and injustice; Complaint d): fault and injustice; and Complaint g): no fault.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman