Summary: Ms X complained about errors during the Council’s pre-birth safeguarding assessment processes. The Council was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about errors in the Council’s pre-birth safeguarding assessment processes. She says during its assessment, the Council ignored her evidence and missed some parts out. She said this wrongly led the Council to conduct further section 47 enquiries which were unnecessary and caused her distress.
2. She wants the Council to accept her evidence, discard the single assessment document and provide a financial remedy for the distress caused.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Ms X’s complaint and spoke with her about it on the phone.
6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
7. Ms X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered all comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

Child protection

8. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
9. The council should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family, for example, midwives, GP, schools and nurseries. The information gathering at this stage enables the council to assess the nature and level of any harm the child may be facing or at risk of facing. The assessment may result in:

• no further action;
• a decision to carry out a more detailed assessment of the child’s needs; or
• a decision to convene a strategy meeting under section 47 of the Children Act 1989.

10. A strategy meeting places a duty on agencies, but mainly the council and the police, to make “such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether to take action to safeguard or promote the welfare of a child in their area”. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
11. If the information gathered under the section 47 enquiries supports concerns and the child may remain at risk of significant harm, the social worker will arrange an initial child protection conference (ICPC). The ICPC decides what action is needed to safeguard the child.
12. If the council concludes an ICPC is not required, the council may decide on other actions such as supporting the child as a Child in Need or involving other agencies or services.

Principles of a good assessment

13. Statutory guidance sets out what makes a good assessment. The guidance says assessment should be a dynamic process and respond to the changing nature and level of need or risk faced by the child. To conduct a good assessment, the council should:
• Put the child at the centre of the assessment;
• Be holistic in its approach, addressing the child’s needs within their family;
• Involve children, ensuring that their voice is heard;
• Involve families;
• Identify risks to the safety and welfare of the child.

What happened

14. In 2021, the Council received a safeguarding referral relating to Ms X and her unborn child. The referral raised concerns that Ms X’s child may be at risk of suffering significant harm.
15. The Council made initial enquiries which it recorded in a single assessment document. This assessment included:
• The reason for the referral and the potential risks to the unborn child.
• A history of Ms X’s previous contact with Police and children’s social care services.
• An assessment of Ms X and her partner’s parenting capacity.
• Ms X’s views.
• Her older children’s views.
• The social worker’s analysis of the information gathered.
• The social worker’s professional opinion that a strategy meeting was needed.
16. The social worker told Ms X of the decision to proceed to a strategy meeting and that the Council was conducting section 47 enquiries. They explained to Ms X what the potential outcomes of the S47 enquiries could be.
17. The Council conducted the enquiries and completed a section 47 report. It decided not to proceed to an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC), but that it should work with Ms X and her partner under a Child in Need plan to continue to reduce the risks to the unborn child.
18. The Social worker told Ms X the outcome of the section 47 enquiries. They confirmed the Council had decided not to proceed to an ICPC and discussed what work they would like to do under the Child in Need plan.
19. Ms X was unhappy with the assessment process and complained to the Council. She said the single assessment contained inaccurate information and had failed to include other relevant points.
20. The Council did not uphold her complaint. It said that an assessment was a continuous process. It agreed to amend one factual inaccuracy. It said at the time of the single assessment, it did not have the information she said was not included, and so could not include it. However, as part of the section 47 enquiries it gathered additional information and this information was then included in the section 47 report.
21. Ms X remained unhappy and brought her complaint to us. She said the Council should never have progressed to section 47 enquiries and errors in the single assessment process led to this.

Analysis

22. Councils have a duty to investigate if they have reason to believe a child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm. The Council received a safeguarding referral relating to Ms X and her unborn child and decided to make initial enquiries by completing a single assessment. This decision is in line with its statutory duties and is not fault.
23. I considered the single assessment report and found no fault with how the Council completed the report. It included relevant information gathered from Ms X, Ms X’s older children, and other relevant parties. Although Ms X disagreed with some of the content, the report included her views and acknowledged this. Although Ms X says some relevant information was not included, the assessment was ongoing, and further information was gathered as part of the section 47 enquiries. The Council carried out the assessment in line with guidance and was not at fault.
24. I also find no fault in how the Council completed the section 47 report. The report included all relevant information to assess the potential risk of harm to Ms X’s unborn child. It included information from Ms X and clearly recorded her views. The Council completed the report in line with the statutory guidance and is not at fault.
25. There was no fault in how the Council completed its assessments so I cannot criticise the decisions made.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation. The Council was not at fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman