Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mrs B’s care and support needs. This is because further investigation is unlikely to find enough evidence of fault to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr C complained the Council’s reassessment of his 95-year-old mother, Mrs B does not meet her assessed needs. Mr C says Mrs B was assessed as needing 24-hour live in care three years ago and since that time her mobility, physical and mental health has deteriorated to such a level she needs on going 24-hour care. Mr C says the current plan does not:

• leave enough time to mobilise Mrs B, change, her pads, return her to her seat and provide lunch or tea. Mr C says Mrs B was not observed mobilising so the Council cannot know how long it takes for Mrs B to move from her chair to the commode, which is in another room, and back again.
• 20 minutes to support with preparation of dinner and medication is not long enough as Mrs B cannot undertake any tasks herself.
• The NHS confirmed Mrs B requires regular mobilising.
• Mr C says Mrs B benefits from being taken out in her wheelchair every day.
• Mrs B’s live in carer is available to answer the door to deliveries and assist with other medical problems.

2. Mr C says the Council should agree to provide the 24-hour live in care it has assessed Mrs B as needing over the past three years.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. A Social Worker and an Occupational Therapist (OT) visited Mrs B in July to reassess her needs. It determined Mrs B’s care needs could be met with four calls a day and determined she did not require 24-hour live in care.
7. Mr C disagrees with the Council’s assessment and says Mrs B’s care needs can only be met by her continuing to have live-in 24-hour care. The Care Needs Assessment and support plan explains how Mrs B’s care needs are to be met including mobilising during each of the four visits, personal care, food preparation, pad changes and medication. In addition to the four daily care visits the Council has agreed three hours a week for carer support with social interaction and shopping. The Council has explained why Mrs B does not require 24-hour live in care and has explained how her assessed care needs can be met. This is professional judgement, which the Ombudsman cannot make comment on unless there is evidence of administrative fault. In this case I have not seen enough evidence of fault to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman