Assessment and care plan


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Salford City Council (18 004 913)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 15-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to clearly explain the top up fee procedures and delayed carrying out a financial assessment of his late mother, Mrs M. On the evidence I have seen the Council was at fault. It failed to clearly explain the top up fee procedure, did not carry out an initial risk assessment of Mrs M, delayed the financial assessment and requested a contribution from Mr X after it assessed Mrs M should not be moved from the care home. This leaves Mr X with a sense of uncertainty over whether he should have had to pay the top up. The Council has agreed to refund the amount Mrs M paid when it delayed the assessment, refund the top up fee paid by Mr X after the Council's risk assessment of Mrs M and pay Mr X £250 to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty caused by its faults. It has also agreed to review its procedures.

  • Warwickshire County Council (18 008 196)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to properly advise his step father, Mr Y or his family about the cost of an emergency respite placement at a care home. Mr X also complains the Council delayed in carrying out a risk assessment on Mr Y's home, a capacity assessment and a financial assessment. This increased the cost of Mr Y's care. The Council's delay in carrying out the financial assessment and home environment assessment amounts to fault. The Council has made an appropriate offer to remedy the injustice caused by this fault.

  • Wakefield City Council (18 004 677)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 11-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X and Ms Y complain the Council unfairly reduced their care packages and left them without support. The Ombudsman finds the Council should have completed a combined assessment and the failure to do so was fault. This has caused an injustice to Mr X and Ms Y as it led to uncertainty about the reasons for the Council's decision. However, there is no evidence that the Council failed to ensure Mr X and Ms Y's care needs were being met. A care agency was put in place to manage sickness from their personal assistants and it offered to move them onto a managed account. The Council has agreed with our recommendation to now carry out a combined assessment.

  • Lancashire County Council (18 010 089)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 10-Jan-2019

    Summary: There is no evidence the Council failed to consider properly the information presented by Mr X.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (18 010 125)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 09-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr D complained that the council declined his application for a carers grant, despite receiving one the previous year. However, we have not found fault with the Council's actions.

  • Birmingham City Council (18 000 058)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 08-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs R says the Council was at fault for failures which left her liable for some of her mother, Mrs C's, care home fees and for a failure to organise a care package to allow Mrs C to be cared for at home. She also says the Council lost some of Mrs C's clothes and her dentures. The Council was at fault. It has already repaid Mrs R's fee contributions. It has agreed to pay sums to Mrs C and Mrs R in recognition of the injustice caused.

  • Lancashire County Council (18 003 992)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 07-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to meet her son's eligible social care needs and was responsible for his eviction from his council property. As a result, she was forced to let him live with her. Mrs X says this put her life in danger and caused her and her family unnecessary distress. She says Mr Z's life was also put in danger because her house is not suitable to meet his needs. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (18 003 276)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 02-Jan-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Mrs P's complaint on behalf of her mother, Mrs Q, that the Council failed to provide fall monitors before her discharge from hospital. Mrs Q fell in her home and remained undiscovered for several hours. The Council also lost some of Mrs P's appeal documents. The Council will send them an apology, pay Mrs P £150 and Mrs Q £500 for the distress caused, and review procedures.

  • Essex County Council (18 007 402)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 02-Jan-2019

    Summary: We uphold this complaint because the Council failed to consider reasonable adjustments when placing contact restrictions on Mr B. And it also delayed in completing a care assessment and care and support plan and in commissioning home care for Mr B. This was fault and caused Mr B avoidable distress and inconvenience. To remedy the injustice, the Council will, within one month, take the action described in this statement which includes a payment (offset against outstanding care charges) and apology.

  • Staffordshire County Council (18 005 920)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 02-Jan-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to carry out all the actions it agreed to a take following her previous complaint, making both her mental health and physical health worse. The Council has not completed all the actions it agreed to take. This has caused unnecessary distress to Ms X. The Council needs to take action to remedy the injustice it has caused.

;