Summary: The Council has already accepted that it was at fault for some of the ways in which it attempted to support Mr and Mrs B ahead of a proposed adoption placement. And its explanations for other actions it took – which it has supported with evidence – are not obviously unreasonable. Consequently, it would not be proportionate to do a further investigation of the issues Mr and Mrs B raise. But the Council has agreed to take steps to improve its service.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I refer to as Mr and Mrs B, were prospective adopters who had a placement lined up by another authority (which I refer to as
   Authority X).
2. Mr and Mrs B believe that the Council – their home authority, which was providing support to them – had a key role in Authority X’s decision to end the proposed placement. They say this matter caused them great distress. They want an apology from the Council, and they want it to improve its service.

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 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)
4. We provide a free service, but we must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by a council, or if further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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)
6. 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

7. I considered information from Mr and Mrs B and the Council. They all 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

Mr and Mrs B’s complaint

8. Mr and Mrs B say:
• The adoption transition plan (for the child to move into their care) failed to acknowledge that the regular travel between council areas was too much for them, given their need to also care for their autistic 11-year-old son.
• They did not receive daily contact from the Council as they were supposed to.
• The Council changed their social worker late on in the transition. It knew the previous social worker would be leaving, but it delayed reallocating the case.
• When the transition ran into difficulties, the Council only communicated with them by telephone, and did not visit them. They did not know what help they needed and should have had more guidance and support from the Council.
• The Council failed to warn them in advance of a review meeting that Authority X was considering ending the placement. They felt ‘ambushed’ in the meeting.
• Although the Council had concerns about the placement – which it repeatedly expressed – it offered no support to overcome those concerns. This led Authority X to end the placement, because it did not have confidence that Mr and Mrs B would receive the right support from the Council after the adoption.
• Nobody properly explained to them why placement had been ended.
• There were delays in the Council’s complaint handling, an officer who was involved in the complaint events sent them the Council’s initial response, and the Council’s final response did not properly address the complaint.

The Council’s investigation into the complaint

9. The Council accepted that:
• It should have advocated for Mr and Mrs B more during Authority X’s preparation of the adoption transition plan, particularly regarding the impact the travelling could have on them. It should also have been more confident in challenging Authority X and should have focused more on their son’s needs.
• Although its social worker telephoned them regularly, conversations often took place while they were in their car, which was not the best way to talk to them.
• It should have introduced their new social worker to them earlier.
• Although their social worker says she gave them advice, this was not always recorded, so the Council cannot say it was given properly.
• It should have allocated a different officer to investigate their initial complaint, because this would have reassured them that the process was fair.
10. However, it also decided that:
• They were told about Authority X potentially ending the placement by telephone the day before the review meeting. It provided case notes which show this.
• It had a duty to raise its concerns with Authority X. However, it made clear that it would support the placement, and it asked Authority X for information about the support the Council should provide. It provided email evidence of this.
• The Council was then surprised by Authority X’s decision to end the placement. And it does not accept that it had a central role in the decision. It is not aware of any support which it should have put in place but which it failed to do so.
• Authority X did not discuss its decision to end the placement with the Council. And, although the Council asked Authority X for a full explanation, it did not give one. The Council provided evidence of its emails to and from Authority X.

The Council’s offers to Mr and Mrs B

11. The Council offered:
• Apologies for its failings on their case.
• To ensure there is learning from the case and that, in future, communication with families takes place at the best place and time for the families.
• To ensure communication with (and support for) families is correctly recorded.
• To invite Authority X to a case review meeting to identify learning.

My findings

12. The Council has answered Mr and Mrs B’s complaints and has accepted that it was at fault for most of them.
13. Where the Council has not accepted it was at fault, its explanations are supported by the evidence it has provided. And its repeated explanations for its role in the ending of the child’s placement are not obviously unreasonable.
14. Many of the issues Mr and Mrs B raise about the Council’s practice are technical. Examples include:
• How a social worker delivered some news to them.
• The method a social worker decided was most appropriate to communicate with them.
• How the Council decided to discuss its concerns about the placement with Authority X.
• How the Council addressed the differences of opinion it had with Authority X.
15. These are all matters of professional judgment, and it is not my role to tell a council how to exercise that judgment. But the Council has considered these aspects of Mr and Mrs B’s complaint, reflected on its practice, and accepted shortcomings.
16. Although the Council had a role in the transition plan, and a duty to share any concerns with Authority X, the decision-making responsibility lay with Authority X. While information provided by the Council must surely have been a factor in that decision, any complaint about it should be referred to Authority X, not the Council.
17. There were no significant delays to the Council’s complaint responses, and, although Mr and Mrs B remain dissatisfied, there is no reason to suggest that the Council’s final response was so inadequate that it amounted to maladministration.
18. In fact, as the Council upheld most of the complaint and explained, with evidence, why it was not upholding the rest, the final response was satisfactory. Any problems with its first response were also addressed in its final response.
19. For all the above reasons, it would not be proportionate to investigate Mr and
    Mrs B’s complaint further. There is little I could add to what the Council has already said, so it is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome.
20. However, despite accepting that it was at fault for several ways in which it supported Mr and Mrs B, the Council’s proposals to improve its service do not cover all the areas which need improvement. And it is also unclear how the Council intends to ensure lessons are learned. It should now clarify this.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. Within two months, the Council has agreed to send us an action plan which sets out how it has fixed, or will fix, the problems it identified with its practice while supporting Mr and Mrs B prior to their proposed adoptive placement. This action plan will incorporate any actions agreed in its case review meeting with
    Authority X.

Back to top

Final decision

22. The Council was at fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman