Summary: There is no evidence that the Council ignored Ms X’s correspondence although the volume of contacts was difficult to manage. The care plan was produced in a timely manner which took account of some previous complaints that care plans had been rushed. Ms X successfully appealed the number of hours allocated.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council ignored her contacts about her care provision and delayed too long in producing a care plan for her.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

What I have and have not investigated

4. I have not investigated matters which have been the subject of previous complaints to the Ombudsman.
5. I have not investigated matters which were over 12 months old when Ms X complained. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information provided by Ms X and by the Council. Both Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement and I considered their comments before I reached a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

7. 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. 
8. Everyone whose needs the council meets must receive a personal budget as part of the care and support plan. The personal budget gives the person clear information about the money allocated to meet the needs identified in the assessment and recorded in the plan. The council should share an indicative amount with the person, and anybody else involved, at the start of care and support planning. It should confirm the final amount of the personal budget through this process. The detail of how the person will use their personal budget will be in the care and support plan. The personal budget must always be enough to meet the person’s care and support needs.
9. There are three main ways a personal budget can be administered:

• as a managed account held by the council with support provided in line with the person’s wishes;
• as a managed account held by a third party (often called an individual service fund or ISF) with support provided in line with the person’s wishes; or
• as a direct payment.
  (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

10. 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. Councils must tell people during the care planning stage which of their needs direct payments could meet.

What happened

11. Ms X has a learning disability. The Council funds a care package for her which from December 2022 was three hours a week to support her “shopping and medical appointments which can be used for social support if there is time left.” That had been reduced from a previous total of 16 hours a week. Her mother, who lives close by, provided other informal support but told the Council she was unable to continue to do so.
12. In March 2023 the Council reviewed Ms X’s needs. At the review visit the social worker noted the views of Ms X’s mother that Ms X had become much more reliant on her since the support was reduced. The social worker noted in her assessment that she felt Ms X needed more support to look at further employment. The record of the assessment visit adds that “Social Prescribing and Maximising Independence were discussed but (Ms X) declined support from both of these agencies”.
13. The assessment was completed on 24 May. The support plan which emanated from it was completed by 20 July. A copy was sent to Ms X (and to her mother) on 18 August. The plan was for support of six hours a week going forward. Ms X’s mother says she had to pursue the Council on multiple occasions to receive a copy of the assessment.
14. The Council’s records show that Ms X’s existing care provider could add the additional three hours of support which the Council had agreed, but not in the blocks of hours on the days Ms X preferred. Ms X declined to have additional support from them on that basis. The Council approached other care providers who were also unable to deliver the exact format of hours Ms X requested. The Council also considered the suitability of offering Direct Payments to Ms X as a way of delivering the flexible service she wanted.
15. Ms X contacted the Council multiple times about the completed support plan after the visit in March. Ms X’s mother complained to the Council as well.
16. The Council replied to Ms X’s complaint in November. It said it recognised that the support plan had taken 11 weeks to complete but said this was due to the need to ensure it was an accurate representation of her needs. The Council also said that as Ms X had previously made complaints that the Council had spent insufficient time completing her assessments, it wanted to be sure that was not a factor for complaint again.
17. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman. She said the Council had ignored contacts from her and from her mother and had ‘blanked’ her.
18. The Council acknowledged there may have been a delay in replying to Ms X’s many contacts. It wrote to her that “Given previous advice that it has been difficult to keep track of the volume of emails you have sent the Local Authority all the matters have been brought together in order to provide a single response. This process has required review of over 180 emails in total received from yourself.”
19. The Council says that due to the volume of correspondence from Ms X it adopted a system of diverting all her emails to a single email box to avoid confusion being caused by answers from different officers. It says service requests and requests for updates were sent to the appropriate officers. Complaints received were able to be compared with previous complaints about the same issue to avoid duplication.

Analysis

20. The Council reviewed Ms X’s needs and wrote to her subsequently with a new support plan. Although that process took longer than Ms X wished, the Council’s records show that her social worker was in regular contact with her during that time.
21. The volume of Ms X’s contacts with the Council became a factor in the delay in responses. That was not the fault of the Council. I have not seen evidence that the Council ignored her or her mother.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I have completed this investigation. I have not seen evidence of fault by the Council in the way it communicated with Ms X which is significant enough for the Ombudsman to be critical.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman