Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to provide her with consistent financial and practical support to enable her to care for her niece Y, as a Special Guardian since 2020. We have found no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has considered Ms X's application for an SGO allowance in 2023 and request for financial help. So, we are minded to complete our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to provide her with consistent financial and practical support to enable her to care for her niece Y, as a Special Guardian since 2020. Ms X says the Council changed, withdrew, and reinstated the financial support she received. And she needed to complain to obtain financial or practical support.
2. Ms X says the Council’s means test to assess for a Special Guardian Order (SGO) allowance does not take into account all outgoings. This has caused her distress, affected her financial ability to care for Y and her own plans for a family. Ms X says the Council has failed to respond to her request for backdated SGO payments to November 2022 and it has wrongly deducted child benefit from its calculations.
3. Ms X says she was also misled by a senior officer who said the allowance she now received will be in place until Y is 18 years old. But was then told it would only be for two years so she will need to apply again.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated Ms X’s complaints about the financial assessment carried out after November 2022 as this was concluded shortly before Ms X complained to us about her concerns. I have not investigated any issues Ms X may have about the SGO and matters before 2022. This is because Ms X’s complaints about matters then are late as it has been over 12 months since she was aware of any concerns. I do not consider there are any good grounds for us to exercise discretion to investigate these matters now especially as the Council agreed to make payments to Ms X in 2021 to resolve her concerns. So, it was open to Ms X to have brought her complaints about these issues to us before now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided with her complaint. I considered information from the Council and the supporting documents it provided along with the relevant law and guidance.
9. Ms X and the Council 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

Special Guardianship order/allowances

10. Special Guardianship is an order made by the Family Court that places a child or young person to live with someone other than their parent(s) on a long-term basis. The person with whom a child is placed will become the child’s Special Guardian.
11. Government guidance on the Special Guardianship Regulations sets out the circumstances in which councils should provide financial support to a Special Guardian. These include situations where there is a financial obstacle to a guardianship arrangement being made, and where the child requires special care. There is no overall obligation on councils to provide support in every case in which a Special Guardianship Order (SGO) is made.
12. If support is provided the council must review the arrangements at least once a year.

The Council’s policy for assessing financial support as part of support plan linked to an Adoption, Special Guardianship Order& Child Arrangement Order

13. The Council’s policy says the financial assessment will take a carer’s income and notional income from savings and deduct personal allowances and specific allowable expenses to arrive at a figure called the Net Residual Income. The purpose of the financial assessment is to determine whether a carer has a sufficient level of net income in order to maintain reasonable standard of living within which to support children. The Net Residual Income figure is used to:
• Determine initially whether or not financial support may be granted.
• Calculate the level of that financial support.
14. The Council’s policy sets out the items to be taken into account which are detailed on financial assessment forms. These include earnings, pensions, child benefit and notional income from capital and savings.

Background to the complaint

15. What follows is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
16. Y was placed with Ms X and her partner in April 2020 as temporary foster carers for the child. Following a connected persons assessment by the Council they were approved as connected carers for Y. Ms X and her partner were approved as special guardians in November 2020 under an SGO. The Council says Ms X and her partner were financially assessed in 2020 for SGO allowance but were not eligible due to their income. But the Council agreed to an SGO allowance for two years to cover the cost of Y’s nursery fees as Ms X and her partner were both in full time employment. The rationale for the decision was that in November 2022 Y would be old enough to receive 30 hours free nursery hours.
17. Ms X raised issues with the Council in 2021 about legal proceedings by a family member she had to deal with for Y. Ms X said she understood the Council would fund the legal fees under the SGO, but she now had a debt for the fees. The Council agreed to pay Ms X’s legal fees and advised her to ensure any future financial support she may need for legal fees was included into Y’s safeguarding plan.
18. The Council stopped paying the SGO allowance in November 2022 according to the SGO. In December 2022 Ms X applied for SGO allowance again. Ms X raised concerns about the impact onto her finances due to the SGO allowance stopping and she was continuing to pay for Y to attend nursery. The Council asked Ms X to complete an SGO allowance application form in January 2023 and provide financial information. It sent a covering letter to explain the evidence required with the financial assessment form. Ms X asked for information about the financial assessment process and calculation and how the Council supported carers. A senior officer contacted Ms X to explain the Council carried out a means test on the applicant and how it was calculated.
19. Ms X provided the information and form in February 2023. The Council completed the assessment of Ms X’s finances in March 2023. It told Ms X she was not eligible for an SGO allowance as her residual income was in excess of the allowance.
20. Ms X was unhappy with the decision and asked the Council to explain the calculation. The Council advised Ms X that when assessing a child’s case, it does an assessment based on income set against allowances, this included deducting child benefit as an income. There are ‘prescribed ‘allowances and these do not take account all outgoings for an individual family. It looks at the rent/mortgage, Council Tax, buildings and content insurance as outgoings. But it does not factor in bills such as heating, food, electric, loans and other insurances as it depends on time of year an applicant is assessed. This is because it can fluctuate dramatically. However, the assessment does have an allowance of £346 a week for the cost of living that sit outside the mortgage, Council Tax and Buildings and contents insurance.
21. The Council told Ms X it was unable to change the financial assessment, but she could contact the kinship team if there were financial difficulties. Ms X made further representations to the Council about the costs involved in caring for Y.
22. The Council says the financial assessment process and means test is the social work team will send a referral form to the Personalisation and Assessment team (P and A team). The P and A team will establish if an applicant meets the financial criteria to be awarded an allowance to look after the relevant child. The P and A team tell the outcome to the social work team. In certain cases, the social work team can decide to discount the means test process and pay an allowance irrespective of the outcome.
23. So, in April 2023 the Council’s resource panel considered a request from Ms X. This was to pay the cost of Y’s nursery fees each month backdated to 1 November 2022 and to continue until September 2023 when Y started at school. The panel noted the background to Y being placed in Ms X’s care and the arrangements to pay a SGO until 1 November 2022 to cover nursery fees. It noted Ms X accepted she was not eligible for a SGO due to income and considered Ms X’s concerns about her finances. The panel agreed to Ms X’s request to pay an amount towards Y’s nursery fees backdated to 1 November 2022 and payable until September 2023.
24. In September 2023 Ms X met with a senior officer to explain the financial difficulties caused by the Council ending the SGO. The officer agreed for her case to go to the resource panel again. The panel agreed to pay further weekly SGO payments from 1 October 2023 for play therapy and breakfast club for Y, disregarding the means test. The allowance would be reviewed each year.
25. In January 2024 Ms X complained to the Council about the decision to stop the SGO payments and impact onto her family. The Council confirmed the action it had taken for her to speak to a senior officer and her case go to the resource panel. The panel agreed to reinstate Ms X’s SGP payments for a further 2 years backdated to 1 November 2022. The officer said the Council would need to assess her personal circumstances again after the two years. The Council says it has no records of a conversation about SGO payments until Y was 18 years old.
26. The officer explained to Ms X at the meeting in September 2023 how the financial assessments were calculated using the prescribed allowances. And confirmed the Council had to follow the policy in place and it was the same for all families.
27. Ms X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure. Ms X raised concerns about the financial allowance paid to her as a kinship carer, the model used and amount she had been paid.
28. The Council responded to Ms X and explained in 2020 it decided to continue to use a mean tested model for financial assessments. Because it was considered to be a robust and established framework which ensured consistency and viability. The Council’s policy explained how the financial support assessments were made and the income taken into account. The allowances were means tested so did not take all outgoings into account but did look at payments such as rent/mortgage and Council Tax. The Council explained following Ms X’s meeting with a senior officer it considered her case at a panel meeting again. The Council agreed to continue to pay an allowance to her in certain exceptional circumstances from 1 October 2023.
29. The Council noted an error in the stage 1 response to Ms X which referred to the SGO payments being for two years. However, it was to be for an annual review according to the Council’s policy. The Council apologised to Ms X for any confusion caused.

My assessment

30. Under the terms of the SGO agreed in 2020 Ms X would have been aware the payments were due to stop in 2022. Ms X was able to reapply for an SGO allowance in 2023. The documents provided show the Council assessed Ms X’s financial circumstances but calculated she was not eligible for any further allowance due to her residual income.
31. I recognise Ms X does not agree with the Council’s decision not to award her a further SGO allowance at this assessment. However, the evidence provided shows the Council has taken into account its policy and regulations when assessing Ms X’s income. It has applied the allowances permitted and explained its calculations to Ms X including taking account of child benefit as income. There is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it financially assessed Ms X for a SGO allowance in 2023.
32. Ms X has been able to challenge the Council’s decision and provide additional information. The Council considered Ms X’s information and exercised discretion to pay Ms X a lower allowance from 1 November 2022 to September 2023. So, I am satisfied there is evidence to show the Council has considered Ms X’s request for backdated allowance to November 2022. The Council has then agreed a further allowance from October 2023.
33. The Council has accepted misleading information in the stage 1 response saying the allowance agreed from October 2023 would be for two years. It will in fact be reviewed annually according to its policy. I appreciate Ms X is unhappy about having to reapply after one year. But unfortunately, this is a requirement of receiving the SGO allowance from the Council and is in line with the requirements in the regulations. The Council has a duty to ensure it is spending its funds according to policy.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation. There is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has considered Ms X's application for an SGO allowance in 2023 and request for financial help.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman