Service improvements

Birmingham City Council

Showing service improvements between 1 April 2021 and 31 March 2022

Find out more about service improvements

When we find fault, we can recommend improvements to systems and processes where they haven’t worked properly, so that others do not suffer from these same problems in future. Common examples are policy changes; procedural reviews; and staff training. Service improvements from decisions are published for 5 years and those from reports are published for 10 years.

Showing 1 - 5 of 5 cases with service improvements

Export results (CSV)

Downloads the current filtered list of service improvement decisions for Birmingham City Council as a CSV file.

  • Birmingham City Council (21 001 736)

    Category: Adult care services Date: 14-Jan-2022

    Summary

    Mr X complained about the care provided to his late father Mr Y and the way the Council dealt with his complaint about that. He said the care workers caused more work and stress for Mrs Y and put Mr X at an increased risk of harm. We find the care provided by the Council fell significantly below an acceptable standard. The Council has agreed to waive or refund 50% of Mr Y’s contribution for the relevant period, and pay Mrs Y £350 and Mr X £150. It has also agreed to take action to avoid similar faults in future.

    Service improvements

    The Council has agreed to consider whether it took appropriate action to deal with the issues arising from Care Provider 1 during the period when its relationship with Mr Y’s family was breaking down.The Council has agreed to review how it responded to Mr X’s concerns about Care Provider 1 in this case and consider whether there are changes to be made to prevent similar problems in future. It has also agreed to ensure any learning from these reviews improves future practice.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 012 901)

    Category: Adult care services Date: 23-Dec-2021

    Summary

    Mr B complained the Trust and the Council delayed his late mother’s discharge from hospital and kept her in hospital against her will on two occasions in December 2019. Mr B said as a result his mother, Mrs C, contracted a hospital acquired infection and this contributed to her untimely death. We found no fault in the way the Trust dealt with Mrs C’s first discharge from hospital. We found fault in the way the Trust and the Council dealt with Mrs C’s second discharge, and this meant she remained in hospital for longer than she wanted. The faults caused avoidable distress and frustration to both Mrs C and Mr B. However, we cannot link the claimed injustice to the fault identified. To put things right the Trust and the Council have agreed to our recommendations and will improve their practice in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005, apologise to Mr B and make an acknowledgement payment.

    Service improvements

    The Council will remind its officer of being mindful of the principles set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 when dealing with safeguarding reports. It will also consider whether any training is necessary for its officers.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 009 677)

    Category: Adult care services Date: 25-Aug-2021

    Summary

    Mrs X complained about the way the Council reassessed her adult son Mr S’s care needs and about its failure to cover the cost of an increase in the care provider’s hourly rate. The Council was at fault. It delayed reassessing Mr S and has not shown how the revised budget is sufficient to meet Mr S’s needs. It has not backdated the direct payments sufficiently leaving Mr S in debt to the care provider. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration the faults caused her. It has also agreed to pay the backdated amounts owed to the care provider and Mr S, and to produce evidence to show how the budget is sufficient to meet Mr S’s needs.

    Service improvements

    The Council will remind staff of the importance of involving family members in a needs assessment and of the need for transparency in determining support hours and that they disclose the support hours tools calculations where requested.The Council will explain what action it has taken to prevent unnecessary delays in future in carrying out reassessments and agreeing and implementing revised budgets.The Council will review the practice of how and when direct payments are increased to determine if they should be raised annually in line with inflation or to recognise the requirement of the living/minimum wage.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 007 920)

    Category: Adult care services Date: 25-Aug-2021

    Summary

    Mr and Mrs X complained about the way the Council reassessed their adult son Mr S’s care needs and about its failure to cover the cost of an increase in the care provider’s hourly rate. The Council was at fault. It delayed reassessing Mr S and has not shown how the revised budget is sufficient to meet Mr S’s needs. It has not backdated the direct payments sufficiently leaving Mr S in debt to the care provider. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr and Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration the faults caused them. It has agreed to pay the backdated amount owed to the care provider and to produce evidence to show how the budget is sufficient to meet Mr S’s needs.

    Service improvements

    The Council has agreed to remind staff of the need for transparency in determining support hours and to disclose the support hours tools calculations where requested.The Council has agreed to explain what action it has taken to prevent unnecessary delays in carrying out reassessments and agreeing and implementing revised budgets.The Council has agreed to review the practice of how and when direct payments are increased to determine if they should be raised annually in line with inflation or to recognise the requirement of the living/minimum wage.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 020 322)

    Category: Adult care services Date: 19-Aug-2021

    Summary

    The Council’s commissioned care provider failed in its care and treatment of the late Mrs X. The Council investigated and upheld the complaints made by her daughter Mrs A, but was unable to take remedial contractual action as the care provider had already sold the home. The Council agrees that it will now offer a sum in recognition of the distress Mrs A was caused by the failings of the commissioned care provider.

    Service improvements

    Review the way allocated social workers monitor care provider records

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