Summary: Ms X complains that the Council failed to carry out a parent carer’s needs assessment properly. We find that the analysis in the assessment was flawed. But as the problem was remedied in a later assessment which came to the same conclusion, we could not say the fault affected the outcome. The Council has agreed to apologise and demonstrate how it has addressed problems with its complaint handling.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council failed to carry out a parent carer's needs assessment properly. She says the assessment did not adequately consider the impact of her son's complex needs on him and on her ability to care for him.
2. She also complains that the investigation into her complaint about the assessment under the children's social care complaints procedure was flawed. This meant the stage 3 Review Panel could not make findings on key parts of her complaint.
3. She says as a result of these failings she has not been receiving the support she needs to help her care for her son.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), 26A(1) and 34(3), as amended)
5. 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)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

7. I discussed the complaint with Ms X and considered the information she provided. I considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries. I considered relevant law, guidance and policy on social care services for children and their carers.
8. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
9. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law, policy and guidance on social care support for children

Assessment of need

10. 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. A disabled child is a child in need. (Children Act 1989, section 17)
11. Local authorities undertake assessments of the needs of the child to determine which services to provide and what action to take. Statutory guidance 'Working Together to Safeguard Children' ('Working Together') outlines an assessment framework for councils to use. Assessments should look at:
• the child's developmental needs, including their health and educational needs and their family and social relationships;
• the parents' or carers' parenting capacity; and
• family and environmental circumstances such as family history, income, housing, social networks and access to community support.
12. If a parent carer of a disabled child 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 needs 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, section 17ZD/E)
13. If the council decides to provide services under section 17 to meet the identified needs, it may offer a payment to the parent carer to enable them to arrange the service themselves. This is known as a direct payment.
14. At the Council, the Children and Young People with Disabilities (CYPWD) Team complete the parent carer needs assessment. These are incorporated into the Children and Families Assessment. The assessment identifies whether the young person or parent carer has needs that cannot be met in the community, and whether additional services are required to meet the identified need.

How families with disabled children access services in Essex

15. Referrals for support are made to the Council’s Children and Families Hub. The Hub screens the referral and provides guidance and signposting to the support available.
16. The Council has four levels of support it offers to families and children in its area.
• Level 1 – Universal services. This provision is available to all children and families who have core needs such as parenting, health and education.
• Level 2 – Additional support. For children and families who would benefit from or require extra help to improve parenting and/or behaviour or to meet specific health needs.
• Level 3 – Intensive support. For vulnerable children and their families with multiple needs or who have a disability resulting in complex needs and where families need substantial support to care for their disabled child.
• Level 4 – Specialist services. For children with significant impairment of function/learning or whose parents are unable to care for them; or, with profound and enduring disability and children are likely to suffer significant harm without the intervention of specialist services.
17. If a child is assessed as needing support at Level 3, the Hub passes the referral to the Family Solutions team. Family Solutions contacts the family to discuss its need and screen the referral. Following that it either provides advice and guidance (a mini-plan) or completes a Triage or Shared Family Assessment.
18. Referrals meeting the threshold for Level 4 are passed to the CYPWD team.

Provision for children with disabilities in Essex

19. The Light Touch service provides 28 hours of support in a six-month period for families who do not qualify for social care support (Level 3 and Level 4). Examples of how families can use Light Touch includes for support at home and helping take a child out on activities.
20. The Council also provides short break services, that includes clubs and activities for children with a disability. Access to short break services is dependent on the level of need of the child and the amount of support needed. Families can access clubs and activities directly, whereas specialist support needs are arranged after an assessment by the CYPWD team.

Statutory children’s social care complaints procedure

21. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children's social care services. The council appoints an Independent Investigating Officer to investigate and an Independent Person to oversee the investigation at stage 2. If the complainant is not satisfied with the outcome they can ask for a stage 3 review by an independent panel. If a council has investigated something under the statutory children's complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

What happened

Background

22. Ms X’s son, P, has a genetic condition as a well as a diagnosis of Attention Hyperactivity Deficit disorder (ADHD) and learning difficulties. He attends a specialist school and has an Education, Health and Care Plan. Ms X has mental and physical health conditions which affect her energy levels and motivation, particularly in the morning. Ms X is separated from P’s father, Mr Y, and P spends part of the week with his father.
23. Ms X has had contact with Children’s Social Care for several years. In 2014 she received support, including through direct payments. Following P’s successful medical treatment the Council stopped the direct payments. Since 2017 Ms X has been asking for social care assessments and support and been told P does not meet the threshold for assessment by the CYPWD service. She received some support through a multi-agency Team Around the Family (TAF) with representatives from health and education professionals involved with P. The 2017 assessment noted P could access after school clubs and holiday schemes. Also Ms X could contact the Short Breaks Service to ask for support through the Light Touch Scheme. Ms X found there were no carers available in the area through this scheme.
24. Following a complaint to the Ombudsman and a TAF meeting in November 2020, the Council agreed to carry out a Child and Family Assessment with a parent carer assessment by the CYPWD service. The TAF meeting described the family as being “at breaking point”, partly because of P’s difficulties sleeping and Ms X reporting she was struggling to care for him. The meeting decided to refer P to the Children’s Learning Disabilities Support Team (CLDS) to provide help to the family with behaviour strategies.

Events from February 2021

25. A social worker from the CYPWD Team completed the Child and Family Assessment in February 2021. Interviews took place virtually because of COVID-19 restrictions. The Assessment report noted the following.
• The family would benefit from additional support around effectively managing P’s behaviours in light of his diagnoses.
• The family had been referred to the CLDS for behaviour management support and a sleep and sensory assessment.
• Ms X and Mr Y had different approaches to P’s behaviour.
• Ms X raised concerns that her physical and mental health difficulties were affecting her ability to care for P as she can be in pain or lack motivation.
• Ms X had asked for direct payments “in her own right” to fund a carer to come to the home to support her, for example to help motivate her and offer mental health support.
26. The conclusion of the assessment was:
• As the difficulties Ms X was experiencing and the support she asked for “relate to her own needs”, rather than P's, she would need to make a referral to Adult Social Care for an assessment of her needs.
• The assessment identified areas where the family would benefit from extra support, but this could be provided through universal and Early Help services. So there was no role for social care services and the CYPWD team would close the case.
• Regular TAF meetings should take place co-ordinated by a lead professional which P’s school would identify, with support from a Family Support officer if necessary.
27. Following the assessment TAF meetings continued. The social worker referred Ms X to Family Solutions who completed a ‘Triage Assessment’ in July. This identified the main problems as Ms X struggling to manage her own health and emotional wellbeing which also affected her parenting capacity, Ms X struggling to ensure P attends school in the mornings, and Ms X and Mr Y having different parenting styles. The assessment suggested some support for the family including:
• completing P’s Occupational Therapy sensory assessment;
• offering P external activities to build confidence and independence;
• P’s school to refer P to an organisation to support P with attendance and independence.
28. The Council says Ms X could not identify any support she wanted from Family Solutions. Ms X had the Adult Social Care assessment which resulted in seven hours a week direct payments for support for her. She used this to employ someone to help motivate her and provide mental health support. The CLDS offered the support with behaviour management following the referral. P was referred to a young carers group.

Complaint

29. Ms X was not happy with the result of the Child and Family Assessment and carers needs assessment and made a formal complaint to the Council. The complaint went through the three stages of the statutory children’s social care complaints procedure.
30. Ms X’s main complaints were as follows:
• That the assessment was inaccurate and inadequate as it failed to record her and her son’s view fully, failed to identify their needs properly and failed to consider how her own physical and mental health difficulties impact on her ability to care for P. She said it was not correct to say she was asking for direct payments in her own right as a disabled person. Rather she was asking for them to support her as a parent carer so she could meet P’s needs as best she could. She said it was not sufficient to simply refer her to Adult Social Care and there was no explanation or evidence of how universal or Early Help services could meet the family’s needs.
• That the Council had failed to explain why P’s needs did not meet the threshold for Tier 4 services.
• That there was delay in starting the stage 2 investigation.
31. The independent Investigating Officer upheld the complaint about delay in starting the stage 2 investigation and recommended that the Council provide an apology.
32. He did not uphold the complaint about the February 2021 assessment. The investigation report said he found no evidence that the assessment was flawed. He found there was an analysis of how Ms X’s and P’s needs impacted on each other. He said the assessment identified that the family did need support, which resulted in a referral to Adult Social Care and offers of other support such as from Family Solutions.
33. The Independent Person agreed with the IO’s findings and recommendation. The Council also accepted them and apologised to Ms X for the delay in dealing with the complaint.
34. Ms X took the complaint to stage 3. She attended the Review Panel hearing in June 2022. The IO attended but the IP was ill and could not attend. The Council’s Complaints Manager was also present but apologised that the relevant Service Manager could not attend and instead had sent a written statement. Ms X did not wish to re-schedule the hearing and so it went ahead.
35. The Review Panel said it could not make any findings on the complaint about the quality of the Child and Family Assessment of February 2021. This was because, without any representative from Children’s Social Care services present at the hearing, the Panel could not test Ms X’s challenges to the stage 2 report against any response from the service. The written statement from the Council did not address the points she had made. Therefore the Panel said it could not take a balanced view of this part of the complaint.
36. The stage 3 report said the Panel felt there was little evidence presented in the investigation report to show Mr Y had been fully included in the assessment of his son’s needs. Nor did the Panel think it was clear which professionals involved with P had contributed to the assessment.
37. The Panel was concerned at the lack of representation from the Service. It said this “seriously impeded its work in the review of the Stage 2 Investigation”. It said while it is often acceptable to allow another officer to attend when the Council agrees with the stage 2 findings, that person should be properly briefed. It said in this case there was enough warning of the date of the meeting to enable this to happen. Ms X only knew about the situation just before the meeting. Although she decided to proceed, she “clearly did not have her complaints fully reviewed as was her right”.
38. The Panel’s recommendations were that the Council should:
• in future guarantee a representative from the service involved in the complaint attends the Panel meeting;
• send an apology to Ms X for the parts of the complaint that were upheld;
• arrange a meeting with her to discuss decisions it had made about the level of service offered;
• address the concerns that Mr Y was not fully involved in the assessment.
39. The Council sent Ms X its final response to the complaint in mid-September 2022. It apologised to her for the delay in the stage 2 investigation and the part of the complaint about lack of proper explanation of the children’s social care Tiers. It offered Ms X a meeting. It also sent her an email asking if she wished to have another assessment and if she agreed to Mr Y being involved.

More recent events

40. Since Ms X made her complaint to the Ombudsman she has had a further Child and Family Assessment, completed in December 2022.
41. The assessment took account of the help the family had been receiving since the previous assessment. It considered Ms X’s request for direct payments to allow her to employ a Personal Assistant to help motivate P to get up in the mornings and get to school on time. The Council decided that the family did not meet the threshold for intervention from the CYPWD service and it did not consider there was a need to provide the support through direct payments Ms X asked for.

Analysis

42. As explained in paragraph 21 above I could not normally re-investigate matters investigated at stage 2 of the statutory children’s social care complaints procedure. In this case, however, there were flaws in the process which mean I can review the stage 2 findings. The Review Panel said it could not reach a conclusion on the part of the complaint about the quality of the February 2021 Child and Family Assessment because no-one from the relevant service attended the meeting to be able to respond to Ms X’s challenges to the stage 2 report. The Review Panel did not have records available, and it is not part of its role to re-examine the evidence. As part of my investigation I have been able to look at the records and can come to a view about whether the assessment was flawed.
43. The Review Panel was concerned about lack of clarity about which professionals contributed to the assessment. Based on the evidence I have seen I am satisfied the Council obtained information from relevant professionals including P’s school, his GP and several medical professionals involved with his care.
44. The Panel also expressed concern about whether Mr Y was fully involved in the assessment. Ms X explained she did not share this concern. The records show Mr Y was involved in the assessment and Ms X is satisfied he was.
45. I have considered how the February 2021 assessment was carried out. The record of the assessment shows the social worker spoke to Ms X and Mr Y but P was reluctant to engage with her. The report noted that P needed an assessment from social care and his parents should have a parent carers’ assessment. It recognised that P’s parents needed either respite or support in the home to prevent a complete breakdown of the family. It recognised that it could be overwhelming caring for a child with disability and complex health needs, especially where the parents have their own health issues.
46. The assessment looked at:
• the views of relevant professionals involved with the family;
• the concerns about the family and what was going well;
• the history of support and assessments from social care;
• Ms X’s and Mr Y’s health needs and what they said about the difficulties they experienced in looking after P;
• P’s health history, his current health and special educational needs, problems with school attendance, sleeping difficulties, his ability but lack of motivation to deal with his self-care needs independently;
• the family’s financial and housing resources and family networks and relationships.
47. Based on the evidence I have seen I consider that the Council followed the process for an assessment as set out in the Working Together guidance. However in my view, by stating that Ms X was asking for support with her own needs, rather than in relation to the impact of her health conditions on her ability to care for P, the analysis and explanation of the outcome in the assessment report is flawed. Ms X had explained repeatedly that the support she was seeking from Children’s Social Care was help with getting P ready for school in the mornings because the impact of her own health conditions made it difficult for her to do so herself. This was separate from her expressed need for support with her own needs. In my view the Council failed to consider properly what Ms X said about her needs as a parent carer and explain how these needs could be met through universal or Early Help services.
48. So I consider that the Council was at fault in how it reached its conclusion on the February 2021 assessment. The question for the Ombudsman now is what impact that fault had and how to remedy any injustice arising from it. Normally if we find an assessment was flawed we would recommend that the Council carry out another assessment. In this case, however, the Council has already completed a Child and Family Assessment recently. This assessment did not result in a decision to provide the support through direct payments Ms X was seeking.
49. I have looked at this latest assessment and my view is this time it did consider whether Ms X needed the support she was asking for because of the effect of her own health on her ability to look after her son. It was a detailed assessment which considered all the areas set out in the Working Together guidance. The assessment report records that Ms X explained how her health needs impact on her ability to get P up in the mornings, especially when she has not slept well herself. It notes the work that had been done with the CLDS on morning and evening routines and a behaviour and sensory programme, and the social activities P had been offered. It noted some improvement in P’s school attendance.
50. In the analysis and reasons for the decision, the social worker explains her view that P does not need physical help with his personal care and has skills appropriate to his age. He has problems with anxiety and needs encouragement and motivation especially in the mornings. But the view was P was capable of getting into a routine of getting up in the morning for school and the more often he does it the easier it will become. The report said the parents recognise that school attendance is an area they need to keep working on together. The social worker took the view that P would not necessarily respond to anyone else coming in to try and motivate him in the mornings. She felt there was also a risk this could create dependency when P has the ability to develop greater independence in this area as he grows older. The social worker noted that while P had a number of diagnoses and sensory and learning difficulties there was no evidence he had a severe learning disability. For this reason he did not meet the criteria for support from the CYPWD Team. The Team Manager supported the social worker’s reasoning.
51. Based on the evidence I have seen I consider that the Child and Family Assessment completed in December 2022 addressed the flaw in the previous assessment. I recognise that Ms X may not agree with the conclusions of the further assessment. But I have no grounds to criticise the outcome if the decision was made properly.
52. So I cannot say that if the assessment had been considered properly in February 2021 it would have led to a different conclusion. This means I am not in a position to recommend a remedy for any loss of support.
53. The independent investigation identified faults in the complaint handling. I make recommendations about this in the next section.

Back to top

Agreed action

54. The Council agreed to my recommendation to take the following action within one month of the final decision on this complaint:
• send a written apology to Ms X for the flaws I have identified in the analysis of the February 2021 Child and Family Assessment;
• pay her £100 to recognise the frustration caused by the faults in the Council’s handling of her complaint.
55. The Council will also tell the Ombudsman, within one month, what steps it has taken or will take to address the complaint-handling faults found during the investigation under the statutory children’s social care complaints procedure. These are to ensure:
• stage 2 investigations are started within the required timescales;
• the service area complained about sends a representative to the stage 3 Review Panel hearing.
56. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

57. I have found there was fault in the Child and Family Assessment completed in February 2021, but based on evidence from a later assessment this did not make a difference to the outcome. There was fault in the complaint handling. I am satisfied with the action the Council has agreed to take to remedy the injustice caused and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman