Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Annual statistics ?Find out more about annual statistics
-
Complaints upheld
83% Complaints upheld by Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
83% of complaints we investigated were upheld.
This compares to an average of 80% in similar authorities.
5 upheld decisions
View upheld decisionsAdjusted for Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council's population, this is
2.2 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents.The average for authorities of this type is
4.4 upheld decisions per 100,000 residents.Statistics are based on a total of 6 investigations for the period between 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024
-
Compliance with Ombudsman recommendations
100% of cases were successfully implemented by Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
100% of cases we were satisfied the Council had successfully implemented our recommendations.
This compares to an average of 99% in similar authorities.
Statistics are based on a total of 3 compliance outcomes for the period between 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024
-
Satisfactory remedies provided by the Council
0% Complaints with satisfactory remedy provided by Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
In 0% of upheld cases we found the Council had provided a satisfactory remedy before the complaint reached the Ombudsman.
This compares to an average of 14% in similar authorities.
0 satisfactory remedy decisions
Statistics are based on a total of 5 upheld decisions for the period between 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024
View all satisfactory remedy decisions
Annual letters
We write to councils each year to give a summary of the complaint statistics we record about them,
and their performance in responding to our investigations.
Reports ?Find out more about reports
In the last nine years, the Ombudsman has published the following reports against Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Rochdale’s systemic SEND issues highlighted in Ombudsman report
Rochdale Borough Council has admitted to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman that it has a backlog of nearly 1,500 support plans to review for children with special educational needs and disabilities.
Rochdale council’s legal challenge rejected and it must now consider Ombudsman's recommendations
Councillors in Rochdale have been told to give proper consideration to a critical report about the way their council pays Special Guardians, after the council unsuccessfully challenged the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s decision and powers in the High Court.
Service improvements ?Find out more about service improvements
Since April 2018, the Council has agreed to make the following improvements to its services following an Ombudsman investigation. We list up to 10 cases below – click ‘view all’ if there are more.
Case reference: 24 002 363
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Disabled facilities grants
- The Council will provide an update on the lessons learnt actions it has agreed to take.
Case reference: 23 019 082
Category: Environment and regulation
Sub Category: Noise
- Remind staff in writing to confirm to complainants the outcome of investigations into whether a statutory nuisance has occurred.
Case reference: 23 011 518
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Disabled facilities grants
- Provide the Ombudsman with confirmation as to what changes it has made to its communication process for Disabled Facilities Grants, following the review it carried out after this complaint.
Case reference: 23 009 491
Category: Education
Sub Category: Special educational needs
- The Council should create a policy on managing the cases of children with Education Health and Care Plans who receive Education Other Than At School or are Electively Home Educated and provide training to officers in the inclusion and special educational needs teams on it.
Case reference: 23 004 393
Category: Housing
Sub Category: Allocations
- The Council has agreed to review its procedures for:• responding to, and recording decisions on, requests for a change inpriority banding; and• notifying applicants of the outcome of their requests and their right to ask for a review.
- The Council has agreed to review its procedures for:• assessing criteria for Band B in cases of unsuitable conditions inprivately rented properties; and• information sharing between its housing standards and housing standards teams in these cases.
Case reference: 22 007 579
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Residential care
- The Council has agreed to provide safeguarding refresher training to relevant adult social care staff.
Case reference: 22 001 690
Category: Housing
Sub Category: Private housing
- The Council has agreed to share this decision statement with relevant staff in the Private Sector Housing Team to reinforce the learning exercise the Council has already completed.
Case reference: 21 018 593
Category: Education
Sub Category: School transport
- The Council should complete its review of its home to school transport policy and write to the Ombudsman explaining how it now complies with the statutory guidance.
Case reference: 20 014 177
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Residential care
- The Council has agreed to continue its work with the Care Provider to ensure new policies and procedures are implemented to protect residents' personal belongings and valuables effectively, and that people are alerted to these on admission.
Case reference: 20 014 052
Category: Adult care services
Sub Category: Residential care
- The Council will explain what action it has taken with the Care Home (under new ownership and management) to ensure it provides care in line with CQC fundamental standards, addressing the learning identified by this complaint about: arranging for prompt re-assessment of needs by the Council, where a resident’s needs have changed significantly and the Home considers it is no longer able to safely meet their needs arranging for assessment of a resident’s potential eligibility for NHS Funded Nursing Care or Continuing Healthcare through completion of an NHS Continuing Healthcare Checklist, where the resident’s needs indicate they may have health needs needing nursing care putting temporary care interventions in place at the Home whilst awaiting a re-assessment of a resident’s needs, such as obtaining specialist input from district nurses / tissue viability nurses / continence specialists / GP's, to ensure that as far as possible the resident’s needs continue to be met at the Home
- The Council will explain what steps it has taken to ensure requests for re-assessments of a care home resident's needs do not ‘fall between the cracks’ and get overlooked.
- The Council will produce and share a SMART action plan setting out the action it has taken, itself and with the Care Home, to prevent a recurrence of the failings in this case. The failings relate to not properly managing a Care Home resident's leg condition and continence needs, and delaying too long in arranging to re-assess the resident's care needs.
Last updated: 4 April 2015