Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council conducted a parent carer needs assessment because its policy of not providing any funding to outcomes meant it did not offer him any practical support. We find fault with the Council’s policy and the way it carried out the assessment. This caused uncertainty and frustration to Mr X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the injustice, and to offer Mr X a new assessment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council carried out a parent carer needs assessment. In particular he complains:

• The Council did not offer any practical support after the assessment.
• The Council’s policy is wrong where it states it will not offer services that require any funding.

2. Mr X says the Council’s assessment resulted in no useful support at a time his family was approaching crisis. It just provided a list of websites that offered no actual service. He thinks the Council’s policy meant the assessors did not properly consider his needs because they knew it could not result in any funded support.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. An organisation should not adopt a blanket or uniform approach or policy that prevents it from considering the circumstances of a particular case. We may find fault in the actions of organisations that ‘fetter their discretion’ in this way.
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(1), as amended)
7. 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

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

10. A parent who is caring for a disabled child has the right to ask a council for a parent carer needs assessment of their own need for support. The assessment must consider a number of factors including:

• whether the parent carer of a disabled child needs support and, if so, what that support might be.
• the parent carer’s wellbeing. This includes considering the impact on the parent carer’s social and economic wellbeing and ability to work.

11. Following the assessment, the council must decide whether the parent carer has support needs and how the council is going to meet those needs (section 17ZD of the Children Act 1989)

What happened

12. Mr X has children with disabilities.
13. The Council carried out a parent carer needs assessment (the assessment) at Mr X’s request. During the assessment Mr X said he wanted an allocated social worker for him to contact when he needed support with his needs.
14. The Council sent Mr X a letter summarising the assessment.
15. Mr X contacted the Council. He said he had not received a copy of the assessment and requested an electronic copy. He asked the Council if it had allocated him a social worker as an outcome of the assessment. The Council told him it had not. The Council told Mr X he should phone a duty number if he needed support from a social worker.
16. Mr X complained he had still not received a copy of the assessment. The Council replied that its records showed it had sent a hardcopy with its earlier letter. It sent an electronic copy. It apologised the hardcopy had not reached him, and for the delay in sending the electronic copy.
17. When Mr X received the assessment he replied with his unhappiness with the outcome. He said the assessment was a token gesture and a waste of his and the Council’s time.
18. Several months later Mr X formally complained to the Council. He said the assessment did not correctly address his needs. He said he believed the Council’s policy of not providing funded services after any parent carer needs assessment was unlawful.
19. The Council responded. It confirmed it allocated no funding to outcomes of parent carer needs assessments. The Council referred to the assessment form which gave Mr X a list of contact numbers and websites of other places that might be able to provide support.
20. Mr X promptly asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaint procedure. The Council provided a final response a short time later. It said the assessment had been conducted in line with its procedures. On that basis it would not escalate the complaint further.
21. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

22. I have considered the Council’s policy. The Council confirmed it stipulated there was no funding for services to meet any outcomes identified in a parent carer needs assessment. The Council fettered its discretion by adopting a policy to never provide funding for services to meet eligible needs. This was fault.
23. I have considered the assessment the Council conducted. The assessment form shows it considered Mr X’s health, wellbeing, social and economic factors and his ability to work. This was in line with the requirements in paragraph 9.
24. However, the assessment form went on to list the support for Mr X. It was primarily a list of contact numbers and websites. Mr X said some of the contacts had no relevance to his circumstances, one was only available to people of a certain religion, and others were no longer in operation. I find this demonstrates the Council did not properly consider what support it might offer Mr X. This was not in line with the requirements in paragraphs 9 and 10. This was fault.
25. I cannot know, on balance, what support the Council would have offered had there been no fault in its policy and the way it did the assessment. But the fault caused significant distress to Mr X in the form of uncertainty and frustration. I recommend the Council apologise to Mr X and offer him a new parent carer needs assessment that addresses my findings of fault.
26. I have decided not to make service improvement recommendations. This is because the Council has recently changed its policy and procedure in response to a different decision we made about similar faults.

Back to top

Action

27. Within four weeks of the date of the final decision the Council should:
1. Apologise to Mr X. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
2. Make a symbolic payment of £150 to acknowledge the distress.
3. Offer Mr X another parent carer needs assessment.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find fault in the way the Council conducted the parent carer needs assessment which caused Mr X injustice. I uphold his complaint. The Council has agreed actions to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman