The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Ms B complained about the service she received from the early help service. She complained it wrongly made a social care referral and now she has a social worker. She said the situation caused her stress and anxiety. The Council upheld part of Ms B’s complaint when it carried out its complaint investigation. It found a support worker should not have shared personal information about herself with Ms B. We are satisfied the Council has taken action to remedy any injustice to Ms B caused by this fault. We did not find any other faults with the Council’s actions.
The complaint
Ms B complained about the service she received from the early help service. She said her family support worker shared her personal experiences, wrongly said she was being abused by her mother, and exaggerated her situation to help her to access alternative housing. Ms B said the early help service wrongly made a social care referral, and she now has a social worker. She said the situation caused her stress and anxiety.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
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) 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.
How I considered this complaint
I considered: Ms B’s complaint and the information she provided; documents supplied by the Council; relevant legislation and guidelines; and the Council’s policies and procedures.
Ms B and the Council commented on a draft decision. I considered their comments before making my final decision.
What I found
Legislation and guidance Early help provides help for children, young people and families as soon as problems or difficulties start to emerge.
Working Together to Safeguard Children gives councils guidance about early help services. It states effective early help relies on local organisations and agencies working together to: identify children and families who would benefit from early help; undertake an assessment of the need for early help; and, provide targeted early help services to address the assessed needs of a child and their family which focuses on activity to improve the outcomes for the child.
The guidance states anyone who has concerns about a child’s welfare should make a referral to children’s social care and should do so immediately if there is a concern the child is suffering significant harm or is likely to do so.
The Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) is a collection of co-located agencies who share information to identify risks to children and young people and to carry out confidential screening, research and referral of vulnerable children. The hub includes children’s services.
What happened Ms B and her baby lived with her mother and her siblings.
In July 2021, a professional referred Ms B to MASH for support to move out of her mother’s house and to live independently with her baby. MASH assigned Ms B’s case to early help.
Early help started working with Ms B in August 2021. It told Homes for Haringey Ms B could not live with her mother because of overcrowding and asked if there was any support it could offer her. Homes for Haringey said it was looking for accommodation for Ms B. It said when a one-bedroom flat became available it would contact Ms B.
Early help recorded that during an assessment session, Ms B disclosed she did not want to live with her mother because she was verbally and physically abusive towards her and her siblings. It noted that Ms B said her mother had been aggressive towards her when she was holding her baby. It recorded that Ms B did not want early help to do anything with the information she shared because she was worried about her mother’s reaction.
Ms B sent text messages to her support worker at early help. These said her mother could not know what she had said and claimed it only happened when her mother was stressed.
Early help referred the family to MASH. MASH assigned the case to children’s services. Early help closed Ms B’s case. Children’s services started a child and family assessment.
Ms B complained to the Council about early help. She said her family support worker: shared her personal experiences; wrongly said she was being abused by her mother; and, exaggerated the situation she was in to help her access alternative housing.
Ms B said because of this, early help made a social care referral, and they became involved with children’s services.
The Council responded to her complaint in October 2021. The Council said it spoke to the support worker, her manager and reviewed the case notes. It found: The support worker shared details from her personal experiences with Ms B, and this was inappropriate. The Council accepted fault and apologised. It said it had raised this with the support worker and it would not happen again.
Its records and interviews evidenced that Ms B disclosed to early help that her mother was physically abusive and she feared returning to live with her. The Council noted Ms B had retracted her allegations. The Council said it could not say which account was true.
The support worker shared information with the housing department to support her housing application. The Council said the support worker disputed that she exaggerated Ms B’s claims. The Council advised it could not find independent evidence to support either position.
Analysis The text messages Ms B sent early help corroborate the Council’s record of what happened. Therefore, on the balance of probability, the Council’s records, including that Ms B disclosed abuse by her mother, are correct. The Council’s records evidence that early help did not share any extra information with Homes for Haringey about Ms B’s situation.
Working Together to Safeguard Children states anyone who has concerns about a child’s welfare should make a referral to children’s social care. In this case, early help was concerned about Ms B’s baby’s and her younger siblings’ welfare. It took the correct action by referring the family to children’s services.
The Council investigated Ms B’s complaint and found the support worker had shared details of her personal experience. The Council accepted this should not have happened and said it had raised this with the worker. It apologised to Ms B. I consider the Council’s apology a suitable remedy for any injustice caused to Ms B by this fault.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr B's complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Ms B. I am satisfied the Council has taken action to remedy that injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman