Decision Report 201908605

Summary

C, a support and advice worker, complained on behalf of their clients (B) in relation to a child in B's care (A).

It was decided at a Child Protection Case Conference (CPCC) that A be formally placed with B and as such, B were deemed as eligible for kinship care payments. As a result of this decision, a kinship care assessment was started but was not completed. It was also decided at the CPCC that a referral should be made to the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration (SCRA). While a full assessment was completed on A and one of their parents, this was not sent to SCRA. C complained that the partnership had unreasonably failed to carry out a kinship care assessment.

We took independent advice from a social worker. We found that the kinship care assessment which had been started following the decision of the CPCC had not been completed within the timescales set out in the Guidance on the Looked After Children (Scotland) Regulations 2009. We also found that the decision taken by the partnership that a kinship care assessment was not required had not been communicated timeously to the other agencies involved in the CPCC or to B. Finally, we found that the level of record-keeping was unreasonable.

C also complained that the partnership had unreasonably failed to make a referral to SCRA. We found that there was sufficient evidence to show that the referral should have been made at the time and that there was no evidence to support the partnership's decision that a referral was no longer required. We also found that the partnership's decision not to send the referral had not been communicated to the agencies involved in the CPCC or to B.

Finally, C complained that the partnership had failed to provide reasonable social work/kinship care support. We found that the partnership had failed to demonstrate reasonable contact with B and had failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their decision to close the case. They also failed to adequately evidence that a sufficient level of assessment had been carried out to conclude that A was no longer a looked after child (child in the care of a local authority) and that all financial payments should stop. As such, we found that the partnership had failed to provide reasonable social work/kinship care support.

We upheld all aspects of C's complaint.

Recommendations

What we asked the organisation to do in this case:

• Apologise to B for the failings identified in this case at complaints. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at www.spso.org.uk/information-leaflets.
• Complete a full kinship care assessment, in line with relevant guidance, in respect of B's care of A. As far as possible, consideration should be given to the circumstances of the household when the assessment should have been completed (not just the current circumstances). This should also take into account the fact that A was formally placed with B, and at the time B had been assessed as kinship carers.

What we said should change to put things right in future:

• Decision-making should be clear and transparent and recorded to ensure accountability and evidence for the actions taken.
• Record-keeping should comply with relevant regulations and guidance.
• Written case records should be appropriately maintained and retained in accordance with relevant legislation and guidance.
• Kinship care assesments should be completed within an appropriate timescale, in line with relevant guidance and legislation.

We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.