Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly carry out a parent carer needs assessment to identify what support it could offer to provide respite from caring for her disabled child between 2020 and 2022. The Council upheld Mrs X’s complaints after investigating them under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. This found a lack of knowledge around parent carer needs assessments which meant Mrs X went without an offer of support for 14 months. The Council was at fault for failing to provide a suitable remedy for the failings it identified. There was also a delay in completing the stage two investigation. The Council agreed to pay Mrs X a total of £700 to acknowledge the distress and frustration the faults caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to adequately carry out a parent carer assessment to identify what support it could provide to help care for her disabled child between 2020 and 2022. The Council upheld her complaints at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure, but Mrs X is still unhappy with the Council’s understanding of parent carer assessments and the recommendations resulting from the stage two investigation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Mrs X about her complaint and considered information she provided.
6. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiry letter. I also considered the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
7. Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Parent carer’s assessment

8. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 says where a council thinks a child is in need it must carry out an assessment. A child is in need when they are “unlikely to achieve or maintain, or to have the opportunity of achieving or maintaining, a reasonable standard of health or development without the provision for him of services by a local authority”.
9. The Act outlines the expectation that an assessment of a Child in Need will be ‘holistic’. This means the assessment will need to take account of the needs of other family members, including the disabled child.
10. A parent carer is entitled to a carer’s assessment to find out what help they need and how these needs can be met. An assessment will look at whether the parent has needs for support in their role as a carer. Sometimes a Council will carry out a standalone parent carer’s assessment but, in most scenarios, it is likely the assessment will be combined with a Child in Need assessment.
11. The Council’s website outlines how it carries out parent carer’s needs assessments. It says parents can ask for a separate carer’s assessment however, in many situations it will combine the assessment with one for the parent’s child. It says the assessment must look at:
• whether the parent has needs for support and what those needs are;
• the parent’s wellbeing; and
• whether it is appropriate for the parent to provide, or continue to provide, care for the disabled child in light of the parent’s needs for support, as well as other needs and wishes.
12. After the assessment the Council says the findings and decisions will be put in a report, called a ‘care plan’, describing the support the parent needs, and how the Council, and other statutory and voluntary organisations can help. The parent will receive a copy, and the plan should be reviewed regularly to be kept up to date.

Children’s statutory complaints procedure

13. Section 26(3) of the Children Act (1989) says all functions of the Council under Part 3 of the Act may form the subject of a complaint under the statutory complaints procedure.
14. Complaint investigations under the statutory procedure consist of three stages:
• Stage one: Staff within the service area complained about try to resolve the complaint. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
• Stage two: An Investigating Officer (IO) and an Independent Person (IP) investigate the complaint. The IO writes a report which includes details of findings, conclusions and outcomes against each point of complaint (i.e. “upheld” or “not upheld”) and any recommendations to remedy injustice to the complainant.

Once the IO has finished the report, a senior manager should act as adjudicating officer. They will consider the complaints, the IO’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations, as well as any report from the IP, and the complainant’s desired outcomes. The adjudicating officer should write to the complainant with their decision on each complaint. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.

• Stage three: A review panel considers the complaint. Following the panel, the members write a report containing a brief summary of the representations and their recommendations for resolution of the issues (The Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006 19(two)). The council must hold the panel within 30 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
3. Unless there is evidence of fault in the investigation process, the Ombudsman will not usually re-investigate a complaint which has been through the full procedure. This is because a properly conducted investigation is independent and robust. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

What happened

16. The following chronology will provide a summary of the key events relevant to this complaint. It does not include every detail of what happened.
17. Mrs X and her husband, Mr X, have three children, two of which, F and G are known to the Council’s ‘Children with Disabilities’ team. As such, they are both Children in Need. They both have a diagnosis of autism, learning difficulties and health needs. This complaint relates to Mrs X’s request for help regarding child F.
18. In July 2020 the Council agreed to carry out an Early Help assessment and carer assessment for Mrs X in respect of F, who at the time was not known to the Council’s Children with Disabilities team. Following the outcome of the assessments Early Help was identified for F and referrals were made to the Continuing Health Team, home care team and the learning disability community nurse team. With regards to help for Mrs X the Council advised her to contact a charity called ‘Action for Carers’ who advised Mrs they were unable to offer her any support.
19. At the end of July 2020 the Council decided F required a Child and Family Assessment. In carrying this out the Council completed a second parent carer needs assessment. This again resulted in the Council referring Mrs X to ‘Action for Carers’. Mrs X challenged the recommendation because of the advice ‘Action for Carers’ had given previously, however she contacted them again and they again advised they were unable to help.
20. In September 2020 the Council began paying Mrs X direct payments for F to cover the cost of a personal assistant during the week and an increased number during school holidays. Records show that as part of the direct payments annual review Mrs X was referred to the DWP for a means tested carer allowance.
21. In February 2020 the Council told Mrs X her respite needs were being met by the direct payment support.
22. Mrs X complained to the Council in June 2021 about how it carried out and considered the parent carer needs assessment. Mrs X says she still needs to be present with the personal assistant and therefore she has no respite. Mrs X said the Council assessment of her needs took no account of her caring responsibilities. Mrs X says she is missing out on support she is entitled to.
23. The Council responded to Mrs X at stage one of the statutory children’s complaints procedure in June 2021. It said the assessment carried out had focused on F’s needs. It said Mrs X had a direct payment surplus which she could use for additional hours if she wished. It said Mrs X had not specified what support she wanted but pointed out she receives a carer allowance from the DWP which she could use for things such as a gym membership.
24. In October 2021 Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage two. Mrs X said the Council had failed to identify how it could help her which it says the parent carer assessment should address. Mrs X said neither assessment the Council had carried out identified her needs.
25. The Council investigated Mrs X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure and the Investigating Officer (IO) completed their report at the end of April 2022. It upheld Mrs X’s complaint. The IO found the Council had insufficient knowledge about what to do with the information Mrs X provided as part of the parent carer assessment. It found that as a result Mrs X was not offered any meaningful support. The IO found the officers carrying out parent carer needs assessment has inconsistent knowledge about possible outcomes of the assessments. The IO recommended the Council deliver bespoke training to staff with six monthly refreshers to new staff to address the lack of knowledge around parent carer needs assessments.
26. The Council wrote to Mrs X with its stage two adjudication letter at the end of June 2022. It noted the Council had carried out a fresh assessment during the stage two investigation and a proposed package for Mrs X was approved in April 2022. The adjudication officer accepted the stage two investigation findings and recommendation. It offered Mrs X a payment totaling £450 to acknowledge the impact on her and for the time and trouble caused.
27. Mrs X remained unhappy and asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage three. She said the investigation took too long and she was still concerned about the Council’s lack of understanding in the area.
28. As the Council had upheld all of Mrs X’s complaints at stage two we accepted an early referral to consider her complaint.
29. Mrs X told us she was happy with the outcome of the stage two investigation but remained concerned the Council still focusses on financial support and referrals to the DWP. Mrs X says she has an ongoing package of respite support which she is happy with. Records show the Council recently approved the continuation of this support until July 2024 when it will carry out a further review.

The Council’s response to us

30. The Council told us it has carried out staff training and discussed parent carer needs assessment as part of the training. It has a new guidance template for staff which includes an example of a properly completed assessment. The Council completes three weekly forums to provide support for staff and it now revisits all assessments on a six monthly basis. The Council pointed us towards its website which outlines the universal services it can offer to parents which are not just financial.
31. The Council said it has made changes to how it carries out stage two investigations to help avoid delays as seen in this case. The IO will take on more responsibility in setting out the investigation and will also be responsible for appointing the external independent person.

Findings

32. It is not our role to reinvestigate matters which have already been subject to a properly conducted and independent investigation. To do so would not be a good use of public resources. Instead, our role is to consider the following:
• Was the investigation properly conducted and are the conclusions evidence based. If not, would the Ombudsman reach a different view based on the information available to us?
• Did the Council offer a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused by fault? If not, would the Ombudsman recommend any further remedial action?
• Has the Council fully implemented any agreed remedy? If not, has the delay caused any further injustice to the complainant?
33. The Council's stage two investigation identified areas where it had been at fault and upheld all of Mrs X’s complaints. The Council carried out the stage two investigation properly so was not at fault. I therefore agree the Council was at fault in how it supported Mrs X in her role as a parent carer.
34. Mrs X was happy with the outcome of her complaint and now has a package of support in place. However, the Council did not properly remedy Mrs X’s injustice. Had it properly considered Mrs X’s carer’s assessments it carried out during 2020 then it is likely, on balance, that Mrs X would have had respite support in place by January 2021 at the latest. This means there was a delay of 14 months, until April 2022 before Mrs X had appropriate support in place. The Council offered her a payment of £450, but I consider a further symbolic payment is justified. I have made a recommendation to that effect below.
35. While I have found no fault in how the Council conducted the stage two investigation there were delays in completing it which took four months longer than allowed. That was fault and caused Mrs X frustration.
36. Mrs X remains concerned about the Council’s understanding of parent carer needs assessments. However, the Council has provided information and evidence showing it has carried out adequate service improvements and staff training since the conclusion of this matter to prevent the same faults occurring again. I am satisfied the Council has taken suitable action so it was not at fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following action:
• Pay Mrs X £600 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused by the Council’s failure to properly consider the outcome of Mrs X’s parent carer needs assessment which resulted in a lack of support over a 14 months period.
• Pay Mrs X £100 to acknowledge the frustration caused by the four month delay in completing the stage two investigation under the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I completed this investigation. I found fault and the Council agreed to my recommendations to remedy the injustice caused by the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman