Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a residential care home. The Care Provider has accepted fault, apologised, and improved its staff training and recruitment process. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to Care Provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr B says the Care Provider has failed to care for his aunt (Ms C) with dignity and respect. Mr B is infuriated. Mr B says they pay a lot of money for the service, but cannot move Ms C, so need reassurance the Care Provider will improve service. Mr B says the Care Provider should employ more dedicated and skilled staff on better pay rates.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms C lives at Newstone House, a care home run by Colten Care (1993) Limited (the Care Provider).
6. Mr B says often when they visit Ms C she is still in her nightie, with her bedroom door wide open. The family find this loss of dignity upsetting and say Ms C would be appalled. The Care Provider explains Ms C is a late riser, so is often still in her nightwear late morning. The Care Provider has agreed with the family that Ms C will use pyjamas rather than a nightie to preserve her dignity.
7. The Care Provider accepts it neglected Ms C on a particular occasion and has apologised to Ms C and her family.
8. The Care Provider confirmed it had to rely on agency staff to ensure the correct staffing levels within the care home. Though it gives agency staff a full induction, it accepts it has not always been able to maintain its expected care standards.
9. The Care Provider says it has focussed on recruitment and retention strategies over the last year which has now reduced its use of agency staff. It introduced a better induction of new staff to improve service.
10. I acknowledge the distress Mr B has had at witnessing his aunt in unacceptable conditions, and his wish for such poor service to end. The Care Provider has given thorough responses to Mr B’s complaints, including meeting with him to discuss his concerns. The Care Provider has accepted fault and acknowledged the impact on Mr B and Ms C by apologising to them. It has explained the actions it is taking to improve service. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to this or reach a different outcome.
11. The Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr B wants in terms of staffing as we have no powers to get involved in personnel matters.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the previous investigation by the Care Provider or reach a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman