Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about Ms Y’s care. If we were to investigate it is unlikely we would add to the Care Provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Care Provider had regard to its duties under the Equality Act.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained Ms Y’s care plan did not meet her needs.
2. Miss X said this caused distress to Ms Y and herself.
3. Miss X would like a review of Ms Y’s care plan, compensation for stress and a point of contact for the family to discuss Ms Y’s needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms Y lived in a care home run by the Care Provider. Her daughter Miss X made a complaint to the Care Provider about the quality of Ms Y’s personal care relating to skin, nails and hair. Miss X said the Equality Act was not considered because Ms Y has specific cultural requirements in her personal care.
8. The Care Provider investigated and considered evidence from the care plan, interviewed staff and observed Ms Y. It concluded Ms Y’s preferences were to complete her care independently although at times she chose not to. It made changes to her care plan to include prompts to complete care throughout the daytime.
9. A meeting took place with Miss X and the Care Provider to discuss Ms Y’s care. The Care Provider stated that some of its care relating to Ms Y’s nails was below standard and It apologised. Care workers were now using the cream Miss X had provided and Ms Y’s skin had improved. The Provider said the new arrangements were now embedded in her care plan and offered Miss X a weekly update call.
10. The Care Provider took the steps we would expect to see following Miss X’s complaint to remedy the injustice to Ms Y. If we were to investigate it is unlikely we would reach a different outcome or add to the Care Provider’s investigation.
11. The Care Provider considered Miss X’s request for care provision and made changes to reflect Ms Y’s needs. In doing so, the Care Provider took account of its duties under the Equality Act. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Care Provider considered Miss X’s request to warrant an investigation.
12. We cannot find that an organisation has breached the Equality Act. However, we can find an organisation at fault for failing to take account of its duties under the Equality Act.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because. The Care Provider has apologised and made changes to Ms Y’s care plan. If we were to investigate it is unlikely we would add to the Care Provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Care Provider had regard to its duties under the Equality Act to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman