Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to arrange another placement for the young person, B, Mrs M fostered within the extended period of notice she gave. The Council left Mrs M and B in the lurch and was responsible for the chaotic end to the placement. This caused Mrs M considerable distress. The Council was wrong to only ‘partially uphold’ Mrs M’s complaint about the matter. This compounded her distress.

The complaint

1. Mrs M complains the Council failed to arrange a new placement in time for the young person, B, she fostered when she gave notice in April 2022. Mrs M decided to end the placement because she was due to have surgery.
2. Mrs M gave the Council six weeks notice, more than the 28 days required. She complains the Council had not made any arrangements by the date she was due to prepare for surgery and left her in the lurch.
3. The Council collected B from school and arranged an emergency placement some distance away. Mrs M describes the events as extremely traumatic for her and B. She has not seen B since.
4. Mrs M complains the Council made a safeguarding referral to the local LADO about the way she ended B’s placement.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have considered the impact of the Council’s actions on Mrs M. I have not considered the impact on B as he is not party to Mrs M’s complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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)
7. Once 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)
8. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I have considered information provided by Mrs M and information provided by the Council. I invited Mrs M and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

10. Mrs M was a foster carer for a national fostering agency. She lives a long way from the Council’s area. The Council placed B with Mrs M a number of years ago. I understand the placement was intended to be ‘permanent’.
11. Mrs M was due to have surgery in May 2022. She had been waiting for the operation for a very long time. As there was to be a period of convalescence following the surgery, Mrs M informed the Council on 8 April 2022 and gave notice to terminate B’s placement.
12. The Council held a ‘stability meeting’ on 20 April 2022 to explore options which might avoid the need to disrupt B’s placement with Mrs M. The Council was concerned that disrupting the placement would have a detrimental impact on him, particularly given the timing and the fact it was unlikely to be able to find another foster carer close by. The Council and Mrs M did not reach an agreement, so the Council began to search for another foster placement for B. The minutes of the meeting say Mrs M agreed to a “rolling notice period” until the end of May.
13. Mrs M says she told the meeting the surgery was scheduled for 26 May. She says she asked the Council to arrange an alternative placement for B from 19 May 2022 since she was required to isolate beforehand.
14. The Council held a review meeting on Monday 16 May 2022. The Council had not found another placement for B. The minutes of the meeting, in a section headed “Brief background (to be completed by CSW prior to the meeting)” say Mrs M had agreed to extend the notice period so that transition could happen in the week commencing 23 May. In a section headed “Updates and discussion”, the minutes say Mrs M reported that her surgery had been scheduled for “next Saturday” and that B would need to move “by Friday this week”. The minutes note, “Mrs M would like to know a plan for Friday as this is the final day that B can be at the home.”
15. During the week, the Council and Mrs M’s supervising social worker at the fostering agency tried to persuade her to delay the surgery. Mrs M declined.
16. Mrs M says she emailed the Council and her supervising social worker at the fostering agency on Thursday 19 May 2022 to ask what would happen the following day.
17. The Council did not reply.
18. The social worker at the fostering agency suggested Mrs M arrange a ‘farewell tea’ and pack B’s belongings, which she did.
19. Mrs M asked the Council to collect B from school the following day. Mrs M has not seen him since.
20. The Council then made a safeguarding referral to the LADO for the area where Mrs M lives about the way Mrs M ended the placement.

Mrs M’s complaint

21. Mrs M complained to the Council on 8 November 2022. The Council responded at both stages of its complaints process. The Council partially upheld Mrs M’s complaint. It accepted that Mrs M gave notice – more than was required – and it failed to arrange a placement for B in time, but believes it did everything it could.
22. The Council also said Mrs M agreed B could stay until the end of May 2022 to give the Council more time to find an alternative placement. Mrs M denies this.
23. Unhappy with the Council’s response, Mrs M complained to the Ombudsman.

Consideration

24. The basic facts are not in dispute. As a foster carer, Mrs M was entitled to give notice to end a placement. She gave more notice than she was required to give. The Council did not find a new foster carer for B within the notice period and had to make emergency arrangements.
25. The Council is, therefore, at fault. I uphold Mrs M’s complaint.
26. It is the nature of fostering that foster carers can end placements. Mrs M ended the placement. The Council failed to arrange a new placement in time. The Council is at fault. The Council was wrong to only ‘partially uphold’ Mrs M’s complaint.
27. The Council only partially upheld Mrs M’s complaint because it believes it did all it could to arrange an alternative foster placement for B in the time available. The Council says there is a national shortage of foster placements.
28. I accept there is a shortage of placements and the Council was unable to find an alternative placement despite its efforts. Nevertheless, these are problems for the Council, not Mrs M. They do not justify only ‘partially’ upholding her complaint. Mrs M did all that she was required to do.
29. The national shortage of foster placements does not justify the Council’s failure to make arrangements for B in time for Mrs M’s surgery. It requires the Council to have a ‘plan B’. Otherwise, everyone is left in the lurch. Regrettably, that is what happened here.
30. The Council considers the timing of Mrs M’s decision to end B’s placement was not in his interests. This, too, is not in dispute. There are other, more appropriate procedures councils can follow to review a foster carer’s approval if the Council has concerns.
31. The Council said in its complaint response that Mrs M had agreed B could stay until the week beginning 23 May 2022 to give the Council more time to find an alternative placement. The implication is that Mrs M had ‘moved the goalposts’ and she was responsible for the chaotic end to B’s placement.
32. I think this is unfair. Mrs M gave notice on 8 April. The fostering agreement required her to give 28 days notice to end the placement. That would have meant the placement ending on 6 May. Having given notice, the Council could not expect Mrs M to care for B beyond this date. A prudent council would have had contingency plans in place for 6 May.
33. Further, the Council does not appear to have had any regard to Mrs M’s views or taken account of the challenges she faced preparing for surgery. The Council was – rightly – concerned with B’s welfare. However, the Council appears to have been relying on Mrs M’s goodwill to continue to provide care beyond the end of the notice period, regardless of her own situation. That is no way to ensure B’s welfare.
34. There is little evidence to support the Council’s position that Mrs M had agreed B could stay until the week commencing 23 May. The first reference I have seen to such an agreement is in the minutes of the 16 May meeting. The same minutes also record Mrs M informing the Council B had to leave by the end of the week. This further highlights the lack of planning by the Council.
35. The Council says Mrs M ended the placement by sending B to school on Friday 20 May with his belongings and asking the Council to collect him. I think this, too, is unfair. Mrs M told the Council B would need a new placement on 8 April. She confirmed the date he would have to leave on 16 May. Mrs M prepared B for the move. Only the Council appears to have been “taken by surprise”, and this appears to be a result of its failure to have regard to anything other than its own difficulties finding an alternative placement.
36. I find the Council’s failure to plan for the end of B’s placement with Mrs M was fault. It caused Mrs M significant distress.
37. I am not investigating a complaint from B, but it is clear the Council let him down too.

The LADO referral

38. The social worker who failed to find a placement for B in time made a referral to the LADO for the area where Mrs M lives. The LADO oversees investigations into allegations or concerns about people who work with children.
39. The referral set out the social worker’s concerns about the way Mrs M ended B’s placement. It was one-sided and failed to acknowledge the Council’s responsibility for the chaotic end to B’s placement. This is fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

40. We have published guidance to explain how we recommend remedies for people who have suffered injustice as a result of fault by a council. Our primary aim is to put people back in the position they would have been in if the fault by the Council had not occurred. When this is not possible, as in the case of Mrs M, we may recommend the Council makes a symbolic payment to acknowledge the avoidable distress.
41. The Council was at fault for failing to arrange another placement for B within the extended period of notice Mrs M gave. The Council left Mrs M and B in the lurch and was responsible for a chaotic end to the placement. This caused Mrs M considerable distress. The Council was wrong to only ‘partially uphold’ Mrs M’s complaint. This compounded her distress.
42. I recommended the Council:
• apologises to Mrs M; and
• offers a symbolic payment of £500.
43. I recommended the Council send a copy of my decision to the LADO for the Council where Mrs M lives and invites them to review the case.
44. We can also make recommendations to prevent similar problems happening to others.
45. I recommended the Council reviews its procedures for disrupted foster placements to include contingency plans in case the Council is unable to find a foster placement in time.
46. I recommended the Council offers the apology and payment and writes to the LADO within one month of my final decision, and reviews its practices within two months.
47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
48. The Council accepted my recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

49. I have completed my investigation as the Council accepted my recommendations.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman