Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (18 009 040)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: Miss X says the Council is at fault because it has not allowed her to modify her personal budget so that she can employ a personal assistant. The Ombudsman recommended the Council review its decision. It has done so and agreed to provide Miss X with a budget that will allow her to employ a suitable personal assistant. For this reason, the Ombudsman has ended his investigation of this complaint.
The complaint
- Miss X says the Council is at fault because it has not allowed her to modify her personal budget so that she can employ a personal assistant to help her with her needs.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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
- If we are satisfied with a council’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)
How I considered this complaint
- As part of my investigation I discussed the complaint with Miss X and her mother. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council. I set out my initial thoughts on the complaint in a draft decision statement and considered Miss X’s comments. I made additional enquiries of the Council and considered the information it provided. I set out my revised view on the complaint in a new draft decision and considered the Council’s and Miss X’s comments in response.
What I found
- When a local authority meets someone’s needs it provides a personal budget as part of their care and support plan. The use of the personal budget will be detailed in the care and support plan. The budget must be sufficient to meet the identified care and support needs.
- There are three main ways in which a personal budget can be administered:
- as a managed account held by the local authority with support provided in line with the person’s wishes;
- as a managed account held by a third party with support provided in line with the person’s wishes; or
- as a direct payment.
Direct Payments
- Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for one to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They provide independence, choice and control by enabling people to commission their own care and support to meet their eligible needs.
Key facts
- Miss X has cerebral palsy and is a wheelchair user. Her physical disabilities prevent her from carrying out daily living tasks and for this reason she requires support from a personal assistant (PA).
- Prior to 2018 Miss X lived outside the Council’s boundaries and received direct payments from another authority to pay for her care needs. She used this to employ a PA who was paid a wage of £8.50 per hour.
- Miss X moved in with her parents (who live within the Council’s boundaries) in early April 2018.
- The Council assessed Miss X’s needs in May and identified the need for help in:
- managing and maintaining nutrition;
- managing personal care needs;
- dressing;
- being able to use the home safely; and
- accessing the local community for social stimulation and wellbeing.
- The assessment concluded that Miss X needed 30 hours of personal and social care support from a PA to achieve these outcomes. It also recognised she wanted her needs met by employing a PA using direct payments.
- The Council told Miss X it would provide funding that equated to £7.83 per hour for her to recruit PA. It would also provide payments to cover the cost of national insurance payments, holiday pay and public liability insurance.
- Miss X did not sign the assessment as she did not agree with the amount of funding she would receive. She also says the assessment did not accurately reflect her needs and she was not asked about some of the issues discussed within it.
- Nevertheless, Miss X advertised for a PA but was unable to recruit one. She says this is because the proposed pay of £7.83 per hour was not sufficient to attract a PA who could meet her needs.
- Miss X asked the Council if she could reduce the number of hours of care she received so that she could afford to pay a PA a higher hourly rate. Miss X hoped this would enable her to recruit a suitable PA. She also believed paying a higher amount would enable her to train a PA to meet her needs and that the PA would remain in place for a long time.
- The Council refused Miss X’s request. It explained that it had to provide the 30 hours of care a week it had assessed her as needing. It told her she could use her own funds to increase the amount she paid to a PA.
- Miss X remained unhappy and complained to the Council. The Council did not alter its view so she complained to us.
- During the initial stages of our investigation, the Council increased the funding to Miss X so that she received 10 hours of care at an hourly rate of £12. This additional funding was not a direct payment and was paid via a care provider. Miss X used the payment on a temporary PA.
- The Council agreed to review Miss X’s assessment and to fully include her in this process. Following this, the Council and Miss X agreed a revised support plan. Within this the Council provides her with funding of £9 per hour allowing her to employ a suitable PA.
Analysis
- The Council refused Miss X’s request to reduce her care hours below what it had assessed she needed. I do not find it at fault for not agreeing to a suggestion which would see her receive less than her assessed care.
- However, the Council should have considered her concerns about being unable to recruit a suitable PA to meet her needs.
- I am pleased the Council acted on the recommendation made in my draft decision to complete a new core assessment. This resulted in a revised support plan being agreed with Miss X. The Council also agreed to pay Miss X a higher hourly rate which allows her to employ a PA who can meet her needs. I am satisfied the Council’s action addressed the substantive injustice caused to by Miss X.
Agreed action
- I acknowledge it took the Council longer than it should have to consider Miss X’s request and to reassess her needs. I recommended it write to Miss X to apologise for the delay and it agreed to do so.
Final decision
- I have ended my investigation of this complaint as the Council has taken suitable action to address the injustice caused to Miss X.
Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman