Summary: The Council was not at fault for how it decided Ms Y’s care needs, nor for reducing the hours of support she received from her care provider. The Council was at fault for delaying in providing Ms Y with an advocate, but this did not cause any injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to move her daughter, Ms Y from her current placement into independent living accommodation. Mrs X also complains about the Council’s decision to reduce the number of hours of support Ms Y received.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We may investigate complaints from the person affected by the complaint issues, or from someone else if they have given their consent. If the person affected cannot give their consent, we may investigate a complaint from a person we decide is a suitable representative. (section 26A or 34C, Local Government Act 1974)
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. As part of this investigation, I considered the information provided by Mrs X and the Council. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information received in response. I sent a draft of this decision to Mrs X and the Council for comments.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Assessment

7. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
8. Councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.

Care Plan

9. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has. The support plan must include a personal budget, which is the money the council has worked out it will cost to arrange the necessary care and support for that person.

Reviews

10. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. Government Care and Support Statutory Guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Councils should consider a light touch review six to eight weeks after agreeing and signing off the plan and personal budget. They should carry out reviews as quickly as is reasonably practicable in a timely manner proportionate to the needs to be met. Councils must also conduct a review if an adult or a person acting on the adult’s behalf makes a reasonable request for one.

Direct payments

11. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for them to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs. The council must ensure people have relevant and timely information about direct payments so they can decide whether to request them. If they do so, the council should support them to use and manage the payment properly.

What happened

12. Ms Y lived in supported living accommodation funded by the Council. As part of her care package Ms Y received eleven hours of one to one contact with carers per week.
13. The Council carried out a procurement exercise to put together a preferred framework of care providers. The care provider who provided Ms Y’s care did not apply to be included on the framework. The Council decided it would look at moving people who were with non-framework providers to providers who were included within its framework. The Council said it would only look to a non-framework care provider where a provider offered something that no other provider could and which was essential to meeting a person’s care needs
14. In May 2021, Ms Y told the Council she wanted to move out of her supported accommodation and live with her partner. The Council allocated Ms Y’s case to a social worker to carry out a review.
15. The Council reviewed Ms Y’s care package in July 2021. The review records show the Council considered Ms Y’s needs and views. By this stage Ms Y decided she no longer wanted to live with her partner. However, Mrs X asked the Council for funding so Ms Y could attend a furniture project for two days per week.
16. The Council decided to grant the funding for Ms Y to attend the furniture project two days per week. The Council also reduced the amount of weekly one to one hours Ms Y received from carers from eleven to seven. The Council’s rationale was that as Ms Y would be out of the supported living accommodation for a longer period, as she was attending the furniture project for two days per week, she did not require the same amount of one to one hours from carers.
17. In September 2021, the Council discussed the prospect of Ms Y moving into independent living. Ms X was allocated a social worker and the Council held a review of her care package in January 2022.
18. The review considered Ms Y’s views, Mrs X’s views and the views of Ms Y’s advocate. Ms Y did not wish to move to an alternative setting. The review looked at what Ms Y could do independently and what she required support with and concluded that Ms Y could manage in an independent living setting but would need support with transitioning to this.
19. The Council also explored the prospect of Ms Y remining in her current accommodation and using a direct payment to pay for this. The Council considered the costs of the care provider currently assisting Ms X and the costs that a registered provider in the Council’s framework would costs. The Council considered that Ms Y would need to contribute around £235 per week to remain in the supported living accommodation.
20. The Council also looked at why Ms X’s care provider was not listed in its framework of providers and this was because the care provider assisting Ms Y did not apply.
21. Following the conclusion of the review into Ms Y’s care, the Council decided she would be better supported at an alternative independent living provider. The Council decided Ms Y’s needs would be better met in a setting which encouraged and supported independence.
22. In March 2022, Mrs X made a formal complaint to the Council. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to move Ms Y. She said alternative providers were unsuitable and the reasons for moving Ms Y were unjustified.
23. The Council’s Safeguarding Adults Team Manager reviewed the way the care assessment was completed in May 2022. The Safeguarding Adults Team Manager found a referral for an advocate for Ms Y should have been completed earlier.
24. The Council provided its response to Mrs X’s complaint in May 2022. The Council said:
• As part of the review of Ms Y’s care plan the social worker met with the family, spoke with Ms Y’s previous social worker and staff at her accommodation. The outcome was that the social worker decided Ms Y’s needs could be met in a lower level setting.
• It considered Ms Y’s current accommodation would be over provision for her support needs. The Council said it was in a good position to plan and support a move to an environment that enabled Ms Y to promote more independence.
• It acknowledged that moving Ms Y to a new setting would be difficult given how long she had lived at her current accommodation. The Council said whatever setting is found, it wanted to have the support of Ms Y and Mrs X to ensure a smooth transition. The Council said at present, no alternative care setting options had been agreed and the social worker would continue to consult with Mrs X about alternative providers.
• Mrs X met with its Safeguarding Adults Team Manager, on 4th May 2022 who reviewed the process the social worker followed during the assessment. The Safeguarding Adults Team Manager advised the referral for an Advocate for Ms Y was sent late. The Council said it would address this with all social workers ensure Advocates are involved as early as possible.
25. Since the conclusion of the complaints process, the Council has arranged for Ms Y to move into alternative accommodation.

Analysis

26. When considering complaints, we may not act like an appeal body. We cannot question the merits of a decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Council’s officers. Instead, we focus on the process by which the decision was made. My role is therefore to consider whether the decision to move Ms Y into alternative accommodation and the decision to reduce her one to one support hours from eleven to seven was taken without fault. I cannot decide on whether Ms Y should have remained in her supported living accommodation. This was a decision for the Council.
27. The Council re-assessed Ms Y in July 2021. At this time Mrs X asked if Ms Y could attend a furniture project. The Council decided Ms Y could attend a furniture project for two days per week. At the same time the Council considered the level of one to one support hours Ms Y received and decided to reduce this to seven hours. In coming to this decision, the Council considered Ms Y would not spend as much time at the supported living accommodation so did not require eleven hours. I am satisfied the Council adequately considered Ms Y’s care needs and provided reasons for its decisions to reduce her one to one hours.
28. In January 2022, the Council decided Ms Y would best be cared for in a independent living setting as opposed to the supported living setting she lived at. While the Council sought to look to change Ms Y’s care provider as she was receiving care from a non-framework provider, the care review also found that Ms Y could move to an independent living setting. This was on the basis Ms Y could manage in a placement which encouraged choice and independence. The care review showed the social worker considered Ms Y’s needs and her ability to carry out tasks to assess her level of independence.
29. The Council recognised Ms Y would need sufficient support to help her move into a new living environment. The Council also explored the options for Ms X to remain in her current accommodation with the use of a direct payment. I am satisfied the Council adequately considered Ms Y’s needs when completing its care review and decided she could be adequately supported in an independent living setting.
30. While the Council delayed in providing Ms X advocacy support, and this was fault, I am satisfied this has not caused injustice to Ms Y. Ms Y and her family were able to express their views and opinions as part of the care review and these were recorded in the care review document. I do not consider that the delay in appointing Ms Y an advocate would have impacted on the outcome of the care review. The Council also agreed to address this point with all social workers to ensure advocacy support was in place for service users who required this.

Back to top

Final decision

31. I have completed my investigation and found the Council was not at fault for its decision to reduce the hours of one to one care Ms Y received. The Council was at fault for not putting advocacy support in place sooner but this did not impact on the Council’s decision to move Ms Y into an independent living setting.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman