Summary: Mrs X complained the Council unfairly reduced her daughter’s care and support hours. She also said it delayed sending her a copy of her daughter’s care and support plan. We find some fault as the Council failed to complete updated assessments before reducing Mrs X’s daughter’s care and support hours. However, this fault did not cause a significant injustice. The Council was also at fault for its delay in providing Mrs X with a copy of her daughter's care and support plan. It apologised for this and provided a copy when it responded to Mrs X’s complaint. This is sufficient to remedy the frustration caused. We do not recommend anything further.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council unfairly reduced her daughter’s (Miss Y) care and support hours. She also said the Council failed to consult with Miss Y and it delayed sending her a copy of Miss Y’s care and support plan.
2. Mrs X says the matter has caused Miss Y distress and it has affected her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. The First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) considers appeals against council decisions regarding special educational needs. We refer to it as the Tribunal in this decision statement.
6. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
7. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Assessment

10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.

What happened

13. This chronology provides an overview of key events in this case and does not detail everything that happened.
14. Miss Y has care and support needs. She moved into supported living accommodation (Placement A) in July 2024. The Council decided Miss Y should have 20 hours per week of 1:1 support at Placement A.
15. Miss Y appealed to the Tribunal over a separate matter regarding her Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and the Council’s decision not to secure a reassessment of her needs. An EHC Plan sets out a child/young person’s special educational needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. The judge issued a consent order in September. This directed the Council to amend section H2 of Miss Y’s EHC Plan to state that she will be provided with supported living accommodation and social care will complete assessments of her needs.
16. Miss Y’s social worker emailed Mrs X in November. She said she was going to complete an assessment of how Miss Y was doing at Placement A. She asked Mrs X if she had any feedback on how it was going. Mrs X did not provide any feedback.
17. The social worker visited Miss Y at Placement A. Miss Y’s support worker was also present. Miss Y said was not using her six hours of support on Sundays to pursue activities. She said she preferred to go out alone for walks.
18. The social worker met with Miss Y’s support worker and the manager at Placement A to discuss Miss Y’s care and support hours. The staff explained Miss Y wanted to start using her hours on a Sunday to learn new skills around travel training. The social worker agreed to reduce the hours on a Sunday from six to four and monitor them. She also said she would reduce the hours the Council had assigned for Miss Y to catch the train as she was not using them.
19. The social worker emailed Mrs X and provided her with a copy of Miss Y’s updated assessment. She provided a breakdown on the reduction of Miss Y’s care and support hours from 20 to 17 per week. She said she would continue to monitor Miss Y’s hours.
20. The social worker emailed Placement A in January 2025 to discuss whether Miss Y was using her care and support hours on a Sunday. Placement A responded and said Miss Y was still not using her hours, but she wanted to keep them.
21. The social worker had a meeting with Miss Y, her support worker and the manager at Placement A in early February. Miss Y said she wanted to get all her Sunday hours back. She said she wanted to go out on a Sunday with other young people at Placement A. Miss Y’s support worker explained this was already possible with the additional support at Placement A. The social worker said she would reduce Miss Y’s care and support hours to 14 per week.
22. The social worker emailed Mrs X and explained she had reduced Miss Y’s care and support hours further. Mrs X responded and asked for the social worker to include Miss Y in the decision-making process. She also said she wanted the social worker to tell her about ant meetings, discussions and decisions regarding Miss Y’s support.
23. The social worker responded and said Miss Y is an adult and she has capacity to make decisions about her care and support needs. Therefore, she would continue to consult with Miss Y directly with matters about her care. She also said she emailed Mrs X in November 2024 and asked for feedback for the review. However, she did not receive a response. The social worker said she had considered Miss Y’s views before deciding to reduce her hours.
24. Placement A emailed the social worker in early May. It said she could reduce Miss Y’s care and support hours to attend her weekly activity from four to two hours as she was now more independent.
25. The social worker emailed Mrs X at the end of May. She said she had tried to get in contact with Miss Y over the last few weeks, but she was busy. Miss Y contacted Placement A and said she wanted Mrs X to be involved in the communication. The social worker said she did not think Miss Y needed an allocated social worker as things were working well for her. She also said Placement A had advised Miss Y had made good progress with travelling independently. She proposed reducing Mrs X’s hours to 12 per week as Miss Y was not using the four hours that was allocated to her to access the weekly activity. She suggested a meeting to discuss matters further.
26. Mrs X responded and said she was unclear whether the social worker had consulted with Miss Y or other professionals when deciding to reduce the care and support hours further. The social worker responded and said she consulted with the manager of Placement A. She also said she had tried to call Miss Y to get her views, but she was unable to get through. Finally, she said she completed the last full assessment for Miss Y in November 2024. There was no need for a full assessment as the Council was only making small changes to Miss Y’s hours.
27. Mrs X complained to the Council in June about its decision to reduce Miss Y’s care and support hours. She said it failed to consult with Miss Y, and it had failed to provide Miss Y’s current care and support plan. She also said it had reduced Miss Y’s support hours before the Tribunal appeal process concluded. This breached the consent order from September 2024.
28. Placement A emailed the social worker in mid-June and asked her to reinstate Miss Y’s six hours of support on a Sunday. It said this would help Miss Y develop essential skills in shopping and travel training. It also said Miss Y had recently been exposed to comments from local teenagers. This had increased her anxiety and made her more hesitant to go out alone. Having a support worker to accompany her would enhance her safety.
29. The Council issued its final response to Mrs X’s complaint in July. It said it had consulted with Miss Y and Placement A before reducing Miss Y’s care and support hours. It also contacted Mrs X about the assessment in November 2024 and asked for feedback. It said the reduction in social care hours did not affect Miss Y’s special educational needs provision, as the number of hours she receives at Placement A is not specified in her EHC Plan. It also said the Care Act 2014 operates independently of the Children and Families Act 2014, which governs EHC Plans. Finally, it apologised for not sending a copy of Miss Y’s most recent care and support plan. It attached a copy with its response.
30. The social worker spoke to Placement A in mid-July to understand why it had asked for Miss Y’s care and support hours on a Sunday to be reinstated. Placement A said there was an incident when teenagers intimidated Miss Y. There was another incident when Miss Y went on a group activity with her housemates. She wandered off and said she did not want to be with the rest of the group. The social worker asked for further information about the incidents. She also asked for information on what Miss Y normally did on Sundays.
31. The social worker emailed Mrs X. She said she had discussed matters with Placement A. She said there were more proportionate ways to mitigate community risks than reinstating Miss Y’s care and support hours. This included supporting staff at Placement A to talk through strategies with Miss Y for situations when she felt unsafe. She also said Placement A’s recording of Miss Y’s Sunday activities showed she rarely used her allocated support hours. Reinstating them would be a step backwards given the progress she had made.

Back to top

Analysis

32. The social worker consulted with Miss Y and staff at Placement A during the review and assessment in November 2024. It also asked Mrs X for her feedback, but she did not provide any. Miss Y said she was not using her Sunday hours, but she wanted to keep them. The social worker considered Miss Y’s views, and decided to reduce some, but not all, of the Sunday hours. That was a decision she was entitled to take. She said she would monitor the hours, and she explained her decision making to Mrs X. I do not find fault.
33. The social worker held a further review meeting in February 2025. Miss Y shared her views, as well as staff from Placement A. Miss Y said she still not using the hours, but she still wanted to keep them. The social worker considered Miss Y’s circumstances, decided to reduce the hours and explained her rationale to Miss Y and Mrs X. That was down to her professional judgement, and I do not find fault.
34. The social worker tried to contact Miss Y in May 2025 to get her views and discuss the small further reduction in her care and support hours after receiving feedback from Placement A. Miss Y asked the social worker to contact Mrs X. The social worker contacted Mrs X, explained why she was proposing to reduce the hours and offered to have a meeting. Mrs X disagreed with this and sent an email with her concerns. The social worker responded to Mrs X’s concerns and said she was reducing the hours based on feedback she had received from Placement A. Miss Y was developing her independence and not using all the hours. I find no fault with the social worker consideration of this matter, even though Mrs X strongly disagrees.
35. I do however have some concerns with the process the Council followed. The care and support statutory guidance states if a council is satisfied after a review that circumstances have changes in a way that affects a care and support plan, it should carry out a needs assessment and then revise the plan and personal budget accordingly. The assessment should not start from the beginning of the process but pick up from what is already known about the person and should be proportionate. Therefore, the Council should have completed updated assessments for Miss Y after the reviews in February and May 2025 and before it updated the care and support plan. Its failure to do so was fault.
36. I have considered whether the Council’s failure to complete updated assessments for Miss Y caused her an injustice. On balance, I have decided it has not. As explained in paragraphs 32 to 34 of this statement, I am satisfied the Council considered Miss Y’s views, her needs and outcomes, and feedback from Placement A before deciding to reduce her and support hours. This is detailed in the review notes, emails and the care and support plans. It would have considered the same information if it had completed updated assessments. Therefore, but for the Council’s fault, it is likely the outcome would still have been the same.
37. Mrs X says the Council reduced Miss Y’s care and support hours despite the judge issuing a consent order in September 2024. The consent order does not stipulate how many care and support hours Miss Y should access at Placement A. Miss Y’s EHC Plan does not stipulate this either. The judge stated in the consent order that it was for adult social care to complete assessments of Miss Y’s care and support needs. I do not find fault.
38. The Council delayed sending Mrs X copies of Miss Y’s updated care and support plan. It apologised for this and provided Mrs X a copy when it responded to her complaint. I am satisfied this is sufficient to remedy the frustration caused to Mrs X. I do not recommend anything further.

Back to top

Decision

39. There was fault by the Council, which did not cause Miss Y an injustice. There was further fault, which the Council remedied. There is no remaining injustice and so I make no recommendations.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman