Thurrock Council (19 009 685)

Category : Children's care services > Disabled children

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 02 Oct 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the level of support their son received from the Council in assessing his social care needs. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for the delay in sending her an amended child and family assessment and for delaying in re-assessing her son’s needs after respite was cancelled. This meant Mr and Mrs X’s son did not receive the respite he was likely entitled to. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

  1. The complainants, whom I refer to as Mr and Mrs X, complaint about the level of support their son, D, received from the Council in assessing his social care needs. Mr and Mrs X say:
    • The Council included incorrect information about Mrs X in D’s care assessment and took a long time to rectify this.
    • They had two social worker visits where the social worker arrived late The social worker also used her mobile phone in an appointment and did not have the correct paperwork.
    • The Council blamed Mrs X for not arranging a home visit with D.
    • The Council has not carried out a new needs assessment following the closure of one of D’s care providers.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. As part of this investigation:
    • I considered the complaint made by Mr and Mrs X and the responses from the Council.
    • I discussed the complaint over the telephone with Mrs X.
    • I made enquiries to the Council and considered the information provided in response.
    • I considered the information Mr and Mrs X provided to the Ombudsman.
    • I sent a draft of this decision to Mr and Mrs X and the Council and considered comments received in response.
  2. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

  1. Local authorities have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need by providing services appropriate to the child's needs. (Children Act 1989, section 17). A disabled child is a child in need.
  2. Local authorities carry out assessments of the needs of the child to determine which services to provide and what action to take. They have a positive duty to take reasonable steps to identify children in need within their area and, when identified, to undertake an assessment of those needs. Schedule 2 part 1 Children Act 1989 provides more detail on the assessment and what it should cover. The whole assessment process should only take 45 working days to compete. The main guidance is Working Together to Safeguard Children.
  3. If a parent carer of a child in need requests it, the local authority must assess whether the parent has support needs and, if so, what those needs are. This is known as a parent carer assessment. The local authority may combine the assessment with an assessment of the needs of the disabled child. The assessment must consider:
    • whether the parent carer has needs for support in relation to the care which he or she provides or intends to provide;
    • whether the disabled child cared for has needs for support;
    • whether those needs could be satisfied (wholly or partly) by services which the authority may provide under section 17; and
    • whether or not to provide those services. (Children Act 1989, sections 17ZA–17ZF)
  4. As part of their services to families, councils must offer carers of disabled children short breaks from caring to help them look after their children at home. (Children Act 1989, Schedule 2, paragraph 6)

Background

  1. Mr and Mrs X receive a care package for D who has autism. The Council was updating D’s child and family assessment and a social worker visited Mr and Mrs X in July 2018. Mr and Mrs X say the Social worker turned up 20 minutes late, used her mobile phone during the meeting to take personal calls and did not have the correct paperwork.
  2. The Council wrote to Mr and Mrs X in September 2018 saying it was updating D’s child and family assessment but was unable to meet with D as part of the assessment. In its letter, the Council said Mrs X was reluctant to allow the social worker to meet with D to complete the child and family assessment.
  3. Mr and Mrs X responded to the Council saying they were happy for D to meet with social workers and provided a list of suitable dates D would be available to meet. She said a social worker had attended two times this year, but D was at school. Mr and Mrs X also said it had been hard to find suitable times for the social worker to attend when D was not either at school or an activity. Mr and Mrs X said the Council made no effort to meet D at the weekends or during the summer holidays when he was at home.
  4. In late September 2018 the Council sent Mr and Mrs X the child and family assessment. The social worker visited Mr and Mrs X in late October 2018. Mr and Mrs X said the social worker turned up 10 minutes late.
  5. At this meeting, the social worker told Mr and Mrs X she had written to them after June 2018 to arrange a meeting with D. Mrs X said she had not received this letter. The social worker agreed to try to locate the letter and send a copy to Mr and Mrs X. Mrs X also raised concerns about the wording of the child and family assessment as it said Mrs X was reluctant to allow social workers to meet with D. Mrs X said she did not receive contact from the social workers to arrange a time for them to meet D and the problem has been social workers are not available to meet D when he is at home. The assessment also gave incorrect reasons for Mrs X's direct payments being suspended a few years ago.
  6. Mrs X wrote to the Council on 14 November 2018 saying she had not received the letter the social worker agreed to send to her. She again mentioned she disagreed with parts of the wording in the assessment document and asked the Council to send the amended child and family assessment document.
  7. The social worker responded to say she could not locate a copy of the letter seeking to arrange a visit with D but said she tried to telephone Mrs X several times from May to September 2018. Mrs X disagreed with this and told the social worker meaningful attempts were not made to contact them between May and September 2018.
  8. Mr and Mrs X made a formal complaint with the Council in late November 2018. They raised the following:
    • The Council failed to maintain accurate records and have made mistakes in D’s assessment document.
    • The child and family assessment did not reflect the comments Mrs X sent to the Council in September 2018.
    • The social worker who visited Mr and Mrs X failed to maintain professional conduct as they arrived late, used their mobile phone and did not have the required paperwork.
    • It has been difficult to arrange a visit with a social worker when D is at home and the Council blamed Mrs X for this.
  9. The Council registered Mrs X’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure and provided a response in mid-December 2018. The Council:
    • Agreed to re-write/omit parts of D’s assessment Mrs X disagrees with, namely in relation to the section about Mrs X not allowing D to meet with a social worker and the section about previous use of direct payments.
    • Apologised for there not being a record of the letter the social worker said she had sent to Mr and Mrs X. The Council agreed to send a letter apologising for the miscommunication.
    • Did not agree the social worker who visited Mrs X had failed to maintain professional conduct.
    • Agreed the letter sent to Mrs X in September 2018 should have used more neutral language.
    • Agreed an alternative approach to home visiting needs to be considered so this can be planned before D arrives home from school.
  10. On 7 January 2019 Mrs X asked for the Council to escalate her complaint to the next stage. Mrs X said she felt the response received from the Council suggested responsibility for D not being assessed lay with her. She said the social worker was late to the meeting, had taken personal calls during the meeting and did not have the correct paperwork. She also said the Council should never have sent the letter in September 2018 saying she was reluctant to allow the social worker to meet D.
  11. In late January 2019 the Council wrote a letter of apology to Mrs X. On 11 February 2019 the Council provided its final response to Mrs X’s complaint. The Council said:
    • It was clear Mrs X was open to staff about carrying out an assessment of D and there is nothing to suggest she was obstructive.
    • It apologised if the conduct of the social worker fell below what Mrs X expected. The Council said while it does not have any tangible evidence to confirm what happened at the meeting, it has spoken to the social worker to remind them of the importance of being punctual, the use of mobile phones and having relevant documentation to hand.
    • A letter was sent to Mrs X apologising for any miscommunication.
  12. Mr and Mrs X contacted the Council on 24 February 2019 as they had not received the updated assessment or letter of apology. The Council responded to say it would send out the letter of apology and the updated assessment. The Council sent the apology letter but did not send the updated assessment.
  13. In February 2019 part of D’s provision was reduced as D’s school failed its Ofsted inspection and as a result decided to reduce services. All the provision provided by his school was stopped from July 2019. This included after school sessions, activity days in the holidays and Saturday sessions. After D’s provision was cancelled he was only accessing a service for two days per week provided by the Council.
  14. The Council agreed to carry out a new assessment of D so it could assess his needs and identify a respite package. A social worker met with Mr and Mrs X and D in June 2019. Mr and Mrs X believed this was to complete the new assessment so the Council could assess D’s needs and identify a new respite package. They also told the social worker the Council had not amended the relevant sections of D’s previous assessment from September 2018.
  15. The social worker did not contact Mr and Mrs X again until 31 October 2019 to arrange a further home visit. Mr and Mrs X replied to the Council to ask what happened to the June 2019 assessment and missing respite for D.
  16. Mr and Mrs X received further communication from the Council saying D’s assessment had not been completed as the June 2019 visit was just to update the current assessment as the care package was no longer available. The Council said it needs additional information to complete a full assessment of D’s needs so it can identify what these are and the best way to meet them. The Council told Mr and Mrs X it needed to arrange a visit to gather this information.
  17. Mr and Mrs X and the Council were in contact over the next few months where Mr and Mrs X put forward dates the family would be available for visits. However, they did not receive a response from the Council.
  18. The Council contacted Mr and Mrs X in March 2020 to ask for further dates it could visit D. The Council said it could not source a full respite package for D until an updated Child and Families assessment was completed as it needed to establish the level and amount of respite for D’s needs. The Council also said it would carry out a carers assessment as part of this.
  19. In response to my enquiries the Council said it has looked for alternative respite for D but due to the Covid 19 lockdown carers would only have been able to take D out for a walk or drive. The Council said Mrs X and the social worker thought this would not be suitable for D as he already does this with his parents. It would be difficult to introduce D to new people if they are not doing an activity which interests him.

Back to top

Analysis

Child and family assessment in 2018

  1. The Council has largely upheld much of Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about this assessment. It recognised the tone of the letter sent to Mr and Mrs X in September 2018 was inappropriate.
  2. In relation to the meeting with the social worker shortly after the assessment document was sent to Mr and Mrs X in September 2018 and the visit in June 2018, I cannot make a finding. For the visit in July 2018, Mr and Mrs X say the social worker turned up 20 minutes late and used her mobile phone in the meeting to take personal calls. From the September 2018 visit Mr and Mrs X say the social worked turned up 10 minutes late and did not have the correct paperwork. The Council’s position is it does not have any evidence to support Mr and Mrs X’s version of events, however it has spoken to the social worker about the concerns raised by Mr and Mrs X following this meeting. Without further evidence to substantiate what happened I consider this to be an appropriate response.
  3. While the Council agreed to amend sections of the child and family assessment document Mr and Mrs X disagreed with, it was at fault for the time taken to do this. The Council agreed to send Mr and Mrs X an amended version of this document in December 2018, however they did not receive the amended version until December 2019. This was despite Mr and Mrs X informing the Council they had not received the amended version of the child and family assessment several times throughout 2019.
  4. Given the Council did not send Mr and Mrs X the amended version of the assessment when it said it would they could not be sure the Council had changed the relevant parts of the assessment document.

Cancellation of provision and re-assessment

  1. D is a disabled child and the Council has accepted this is the case. It therefore has a duty to assess his needs to ensure it provides services to promote his welfare if needed. It also has a duty to assess a parents needs as a parent carer if they ask for this.
  2. The Council was at fault for failing to reassess D’s needs. In early 2019 part of D’s respite provided by his school was reduced and eventually cancelled in July 2019. The Council told Mr and Mrs X it would carry out a reassessment of D’s needs to establish these and the respite required. The Council did visit D in June 2019. Mr and Mrs X believed this was to reassess D, but the Council later told them this was just to update the current assessment. It was reasonable for Mr and Mrs X to believe this visit was to reassess D given the Council had informed them it would be doing this.
  3. The Council did not update Mr and Mrs X further until 31 October 2019 when it asked to visit D so it could carry out a child and family assessment to establish the extent of his needs and the appropriate support package for the family. Mr and Mrs X gave the Council several available dates a visit could take place from the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020, however Mr and Mrs X did not receive a response from the Council causing further delay. To date the Council has not assessed D’s needs so that a package of respite can be provided.
  4. The Council did look for alternative respite for D but there were practical issues in delivering this due to the Covid 19 lockdown. However, D’s care package was significantly reduced from July 2019 well before the Covid 19 lockdown. The Council should have either sourced provision to replace this much sooner or carried out the re-assessment of D’s needs so it could identify and provide a new package to support D’s needs.
  5. I cannot say what respite or how much D would have received had the Council re-assessed D when his respite package reduced. Nor can I say what the outcome will be of the re-assessment the Council is due to carry out. Nevertheless, the loss of opportunity to access the respite D was entitled to after much of his provision was cancelled represents an injustice to Mr and Mrs X and D. Mr and Mrs X have also experienced frustration and distress because of the delay in re-assessing D since June 2019.

Agreed action

  1. Within four weeks of my final decision the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
    • Re-assess D to establish his needs and the package of support needed.
    • Pay Mr and Mrs X £500 to recognise the loss of opportunity to access full respite services.
    • Pay Mr and Mrs X £250 to recognise the anxiety and distress caused by the delay in re-assessing D.
    • Apologise to Mr and Mrs X for not sending them the amended child and family assessment until December 2019 and pay Mr and Mrs X £250 to recognise the time and trouble in pursuing this with the Council.
  2. In coming to these figures I have considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr and Mrs X. The Council has agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.
  2. Mr and Mrs X may make a further complaint to the Ombudsman once the Council has carried out the assessment of her son’s and any parent as a carer’s needs and we can consider whether it is appropriate to recommend any further remedy for lack of services received.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings