Summary
Ms C complained on behalf of Mrs A, about Moray Council (the Council) Children and Families social work department. Mrs A's two children, Child Y and Child Z, were removed from Mrs A's care in September 2016 as a result of a Child Protection Order (an emergency legal order granted by a Sheriff which allows the local authority to remove a child from their parent's care). Ms C complained that the Council unreasonably failed to gather and take into account relevant information when making decisions regarding the children's care and education, both before and after the children were removed from Mrs A's care and placed into accommodation.
During our investigation, we took independent advice from a social worker (the Adviser). We identified the following failings:
- Prior to the children being accommodated:
- little or no evidence of exploring parenting style, family or other supports; or questioning and challenging what was observed;
- little or no evidence of clear assessments of risk and need;
- little evidence of the Getting It Right For Every Child practice model (GIRFEC; the Scottish Government's approach to supporting children and young people) being utilised, including a robust, multi-agency assessment; and
- failure to make attempts to engage the family in supporting the prevention of a breakdown in the family or to provide kinship care as a means of preventing statutory care.
- Following the children being accommodated:
- failure to consider and arrange independent advocacy for the children in a timely manner;
- in the absence of independent advocacy, failure to explore ways of communicating with the children to elicit their views and feelings;
- failure to include the views and feelings of the children in many reports;
- failure to facilitate Child Y attending their hearings when Child Y voiced their wish to attend;
- when Child Y changed their story about allegations made, it appeared that the allegations were given less weight and there was not enough understanding of the way in which children and young people may retract their stories. Rehabilitation with the children's father (Mr A) went ahead without this being resolved or there being more clarity on the risks and safeguards in place;
- failure to reasonably consider and assess potential kinship placements and follow national guidance and legislation in relation to kinship care assessments;
- failure to communicate in a reasonable and timely way with extended family in relation to kinship care;
- no evidence that Child Z's views were obtained in relation to moving school; or that Child Z or the new school were prepared for the transition;
- failure to promote or encourage extended family relationships;
- failure to inform Mr & Mrs A of Child Z's admission to hospital shortly after they were accommodated; and
- failure to complete a number of Looked After Child forms which should have been completed at the point of the children being accommodated, in a timely manner.
Given these numerous and significant failings, we upheld the complaint and made a number of recommendations to address these failings.
Ms C also complained that the Council failed to handle complaints raised by herself and Mrs A in a reasonable and timely manner. We acknowledged that the complaint was complex, involved correspondence from a number of different people, some of which had overlapping issues, and that there were concurrent information requests. The Council had taken some action to address their complaint handling failings. However, we considered that it remained that much of the handling of Ms C and Mrs A's complaints was unreasonable and we did not consider the action previously taken by the Council to address all of the complaint handling failings. We therefore upheld this aspect of Ms C's complaint.
Redress and Recommendations
The Ombudsman's recommendations are set out below:
What we are asking the Council to do for Ms C and Mrs A:
| Rec. number |
What we found |
What the organisation should do |
What we need to see |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. |
Under complaint (a) we found that the Council unreasonably failed to gather and take into account relevant information when making decisions regarding the children's care and education. (The individual failings are listed below.) Under complaint (b) we found that the Council failed to deal with complaints raised by Mrs A and Ms C in a reasonable and timeous manner |
Apologise to Mrs A, Child Y and Child Z for the failure to reasonably gather and take into account relevant information when making decisions regarding the children's care and education. Apologise to Mrs A and Ms C for the failure to reasonably and timeously respond to their complaints. The apologies should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at www.spso.org.uk/informationleaflets |
Copy or record of the apologies. By: 16 September 2020 |
We are asking the Council to improve the way they do things:
| Rec. number |
What we found |
Outcome needed |
What we need to see |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2. |
Under complaint (a) we found that there was no clear use of the Getting It Right For Every Child practice model being applied (including appropriate multi-agency and risk assessments) when recording the concerns highlighted in the months prior to the children's admission to care; which would have assisted practitioners to identify the cumulative concerns and collated information from other agencies
|
The Council's child protection function should be delivered within the context of supporting families and meeting children's needs through the Getting It Right For Every Child practice model as stated in the National Guidance for Child Protection In Scotland and the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014
|
Evidence that the findings of this investigation have been fed back to relevant staff in a supportive manner that encourages learning. Evidence that the Council have considered any training needs for social work staff in relation to the Getting It Right For Every Child practice model and child protection. The Council may wish to consider using this case as a training tool. Evidence that the Council have reviewed their Child Protection guidance to ensure it takes into account the Getting It Right For Every Child practice model and the relevant legislation in relation to supporting families and meeting children's needs. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 3. | Under complaint (a) we found that there was a failure to engage the extended family in supporting the prevention of a breakdown in the family or to provide kinship care as a means of preventing statutory care | In line with the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, the Council should promote the upbringing of children by their families and the possibility of kinship care placements should be considered at the earliest opportunity and if this is not possible, the reasons should be recorded |
Evidence that the findings of this investigation have been fed back to relevant staff in a supportive manner that encourages learning. Evidence that there is appropriate policy and guidance in place to ensure that the possibility of kinship care placements are considered at the earliest opportunity. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 4. | Under complaint (a) we found that there was both an absence and delay in properly seeking the views of the children, including by use of independent advocacy, and including these views in the relevant plans and paperwork | The views of children should be sought in line with the Getting It Right For Every Child Framework and as laid down in the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. The views of children should be listened to, considered and recorded; and independent advocacy should be considered for children in a timely manner |
Evidence that social workers have been reminded of the importance of recording children's views appropriately and considering the use of independent advocacy. Evidence that the Council have considered any training needs for social work staff in relation to seeking and including children's views. Evidence of an audit being carried out of Looked After Child and Child Protection paperwork, and Child's Plans, to ensure that children's views are being sought and included appropriately. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 5. | Under complaint (a) we found that there was a failure to facilitate Child Y attending their hearings when Child Y voiced their wish to attend | If a child expresses a wish to attend their Children's Hearing, they should be facilitated to attend, regardless of whether they have previously been excused; in line with national guidance |
Evidence that social workers have been reminded of a child's absolute right to attend their hearings; and of their responsibility to facilitate this if a child has expressed a wish to attend. Evidence that the Council have considered any training needs for staff in relation to their responsibilities to facilitate children to attend their hearings. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 6. | Under complaint (a) we found that the timescales to complete the kinship care assessments were considerably outwith the recommended timescales laid down by the statutory guidance | Timescales for kinship care assessments should be in line with the Looked After Children (Scotland) Regulations 2009 and the Adoption (Scotland) Act 2007 - Part 9 Kinship Care unless the reasons as to why this is not possible are specifically recorded |
Evidence that the Council's policy and procedures on kinship care assessments are in line with the timescales in statutory guidance. Evidence that social work staff at the Council have been reminded of the guidance in relation to kinship care assessments. Evidence that there is a system in place to monitor timescales for kinship care assessment and management action taken to address when timescales are not being adhered to. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 7. | Under complaint (a) we found that communication with the extended family regarding consideration and assessment of kinship care placements was delayed, unclear, and not proactive | Communication with extended family in relation to potential kinship care placements should be proactive, clear, and timely |
Evidence that the findings of this investigation in relation to communication with extended family members have been fed back to relevant staff in a supportive manner that encourages learning. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 8. | Under complaint (a) we found that Child Z moved school without any proper sharing of information and preparation and the decision was made outwith a Looked After Child review and prior to a Children's Hearing, without reasonable evidence that this was warranted | Prior to any decision that brings about a change to the child's plan, or before a decision to seek a Children's Hearing for a child whose supervision order they think should be varied or terminated, a Looked After Child review should be held |
Evidence that social workers have been reminded that significant decisions concerning a child should not be made outwith a formal review. Evidence of an audit to ensure Looked After Child reviews are being held appropriately. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 9. | Under complaint (a) we found that when Child Z moved school, the new school were not notified of the background and did not learn of the involvement of other agencies until they received the child's educational file some time later | When a child who has social work involvement moves school, the new school should be informed of this in a timely manner in line with the Getting It Right For Every Child national framework principles of working collaboratively with the child at the centre |
Evidence that the findings of this investigation in relation to the Getting It Right For Every Child national framework principles of working collaboratively with the child at the centre have been fed back to the relevant staff in a supportive manner which encourages learning. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 10. | Under complaint (a) we found that the records evidence that the attitude of social work was at times judgemental and based on pejorative personal opinions | Social workers should avoid making statements based on assumptions and pejorative personal opinion |
Evidence that the findings of this investigation in relation to record-keeping and attitude towards families have been fed back to relevant staff in a supportive manner that encourages learning. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 11. | Under complaint (a) we found that the parents were not notified that their child was admitted to hospital despite still having parental responsibilities and rights | Parents with parental rights and responsibilities should, as far as possible, be consulted prior to medical treatment or in cases of an emergency admission be notified as soon as possible, in line with the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 |
Evidence that social workers have been reminded of and understand their legal obligations in respect of children and parents. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 12. | Under complaint (a) we found that although Child Z moved to a new local authority area, a letter to the authority informing them that Child Z was living there and requesting a transfer Child Protection Case Conference was not sent until three weeks after they moved. This was outwith guidance and also caused the receiving local authority to be outwith the timeframe for holding the Child Protection Case Conference | The Council should adhere to the National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland in relation to notifying the receiving local authority immediately when children and/or their family move |
Evidence that social workers have been reminded of their obligations under the National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland. Evidence that the Council's procedures and guidelines meet the National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland standards. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 13. | Under complaint (a) we found that Looked After Child forms, including a general medical consent form, were not completed at the point of admission to care and there was a delay of almost four weeks following accommodation | The relevant Looked After Child forms, including general medical consent, should be completed at the point of a child being admitted to the care of the local authority, or in cases of emergency, as soon as is practicably possible after the child is placed; in line with The Looked After Children (Scotland) Regulations 2009 |
Evidence of an audit to ensure that Looked After Child forms are completed prior to or at the point of a child being accommodated. By: 9 December 2020 |
| 14. | Under complaint (a) we found that there were numerous and significant failings in relation to gathering and taking into account relevant information when making decisions regarding the children's care and education | When making decisions regarding the care and education of children, the Council should appropriately gather and take into account relevant information |
Evidence that the findings of this investigation have been reviewed in full by a senior member of staff at the Council and that they are satisfied that all failings have been addressed by the recommendations above or actions already taken by the Council. If they are not, an action plan should be devised to ensure that all issues are addressed appropriately and fully. By: 9 December 2020 |
We are asking the Council to improve their complaints handling:
| Rec. number |
What we found |
Outcome needed |
What we need to see |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15. |
Under complaint (b) we found that there were serious and significant failures in relation to complaints handling
|
Complaints should be handled in line with the relevant complaint handling procedure
|
Evidence that the Council have carried out a review into the handling of this complaint, identified where improvement action (such as training) is required, and developed an action plan to improve complaint handling. By: 9 December 2020
|
Feedback
Points to note
The Adviser noted that there was a regular programme of supervised contact with both parents, but commented that, in their view, the timetable of contact placed a heavy burden on the children as on occasion they were having two contact visits a day, one with each parent and some that included extended family. The Adviser acknowledged that it is always a difficult balance to ensure there is sufficient contact but also that it is relaxed and comfortable to promote a good experience and build relationships. However, they considered the contact plan, while demonstrating a regular arrangement, was a demanding one for everyone, not least the children. The Council may wish to reflect on this matter.