Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Stirling Council

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 202102472 Sector Local Government Category Education/Primary School Decided 01 April 2023

View Ealing Council scorecard

School Estate Management Failures

Full decision

Summary

C is the parent of a child (A) who has conditions affecting their mobility and continence. C complained about how A's school was managing their personal care and how the council's disability social work department behaved towards C and A.

We took independent advice from a social worker. We found that the Intimate Care Guidance in place at the time should have been updated and that having a written intimate care plan in place for A would have helped to ensure clarity regarding C's concerns about the management of A's personal care. We upheld C's complaint that the council's response to their concerns had not been reasonable.

We found that the disability social work team poorly handled arrangements to speak to A and did not give C enough notice of their intentions. While the council had accepted that they had used inappropriate language to describe C, we found that they had not fully acknowledged this and the impact that this may have had. We upheld C's complaint that the disability social work department failed to behave in a reasonable manner towards them and A.

Recommendations

What we asked the organisation to do in this case: Apologise to C for their behaviour in relation to arranging a meeting with the children, and their use of inappropriate language. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at HYPERLINK "http://www.spso.org.uk/information-leaflets" www.spso.org.uk/information-leaflets .

What we said should change to put things right in future: The council should ensure that parents, in particular where they are the main carer, are given sufficient notice of social work's intentions to meet with children. The council should ensure that where inappropriate language may have been used, the impact of this is fully acknowledged.

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.

Other decisions involving Stirling Council

Reference	Date	Summary	Outcome
202202657	01 May 2025	C complained about the council’s decsion to build a prison facility next to their and others’ property. C’s complaint covers …	Not Upheld
202104071	01 Feb 2023	C complained about the way that the council had handled a planning application related to a development of new homes …	Partly Upheld
202101005	01 Dec 2022	C raised a complaint on behalf of their advocacy partner (A). Following A’s arrest, C complained that A’s child (B) …	Partly Upheld
201910373	01 Mar 2022	C complained to the council about the school their child (A) attends. A was transitioning from early years to primary …	Partly Upheld
201808327	01 Jul 2020	Mr and Mrs C complained that the council failed to act appropriately, impartially or in line with their obligations when …	Partly Upheld

View all decisions for this organisation

Source decision Back to decisions list

Stirling Council

Full decision

Summary

Recommendations

Related reading

Other decisions involving Stirling Council