Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms A’s complaint about the care provider’s decision it could no longer offer her mother, Mrs B, a placement at its care home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the care provider.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms A, complains about the care provider’s decision it could no longer offer her mother a place at its care home following a third assessment, a few days before Mrs B was due to move in.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• It is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Ms A provided in her complaint to the Ombudsman. I also considered information from the care provider, including copies of correspondence with Ms A and the pre-admission assessment documents. I sent Ms A a draft version of this statement and considered her comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms A complains on behalf of her mother Mrs B. She is Mrs B’s attorney for health and welfare and for property and financial affairs.
6. Ms A complains about the care provider’s decision it could no longer offer Mrs B a placement at its care home following a third assessment of her care needs, shortly before she was due to move in. Ms A believes the care home refused to accept her mother because the presentation of her dementia is unattractive.
7. Ms A first contacted the care home in mid-2018, prior to the home opening, to enquire about a placement for Mrs B. She paid a deposit to secure a room.
8. In July 2019, the home assessed Mrs B and said it would be able to meet her needs. The family did not proceed with the placement at that time, due to other family commitments. The care provider contacted Ms A in late August to say they would need to carry out a new assessment prior to Mrs B’s admission as it had been over a month since its assessment.
9. The care home carried out a second assessment in early October. This also found the home could meet Mrs B’s needs. Mrs B’s admission was planned for a few days later, but this was cancelled by Ms A. A new admission date was set and then further postponed, with a new admission date set for early November.
10. The care provider says it decided to carry out a further assessment, prior to Mrs B’s admission, after becoming concerned, following correspondence with Ms A, that her needs may have increased.
11. The care home’s third assessment found Mrs B’s care needs had increased following a deterioration in her condition. It decided it could not meet Mrs B’s needs, so could not offer her a placement. It said it considered Mrs B’s significant change in presentation as well as information provided by staff at her existing care home who also indicated that Mrs B’s condition had deteriorated and would need one to one care. It did not consider a move to a new home would be in Mrs B’s best interests.
12. The care home’s terms and conditions state ‘Prior to the admission of the Resident to the home, the Resident’s needs will be assessed by an experienced person. Admission to the home will only be permitted if the Registered Manager has confirmed to the Resident that it is anticipated that his/her needs identified in such an assessment can reasonably be met.’

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no sign of fault by the care provider. We cannot question whether a decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.
14. Whilst it was clearly disappointing to find the home was no longer willing to accept Mrs B, following the third assessment, I can see no sign of fault in the way the care provider reached its decision. It is a decision it was entitled to make.
15. There is no fault in the care provider’s decision to carry out a further assessment prior to Mrs B’s admission, particularly given its concern, whether well founded or not, that her condition may have deteriorated since the previous one. It is clear the decision not to accept Mrs B was solely based on the most recent assessment in which it found her condition had deteriorated. Prior to this, it was satisfied it could meet her needs, so would have accepted her if she had been admitted earlier in the year.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman