Information request relating to investigations and recommendations about Cafcass
I write in response to your information request dated 3 March 2015 relating to investigations about Cafcass (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) and the recommendations we had made.
You have asked us to explain why there is a difference between the number of cases we upheld/partly upheld about Cafcass and the number of recommendations we made.
Please find attached a spreadsheet which sets out the accurate number of upheld/partly upheld cases about Cafcass and the recommendations we made. You will see that the number of recommendations made exceeds the number of upheld complaints. This is because we often make more than one recommendation in each case.
You have asked for the definitions of ‘full upheld’, ‘partly upheld’ and ‘resolved without a finding’.
I have attached a copy of our investigation manual which provides definitions of fully upheld and partly upheld investigations on page 22. ‘Resolved without a finding’ is used when there has been a mediated outcome in a case or where we have decided that further work is required before we can make a finding.
Our general approach to remedy, including financial remedy, is set out in our Principles for Remedy. Further information can also be found in our investigation manual (pages 18-22).
I hope this information is helpful.
Yours sincerely
FOI/DP Officer
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman