Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for her child, Child Y. There was fault in the Council’s current assessment that Child Y no longer requires the adaptation previously approved in 2021. There has also been considerable delay in the Council’s progression of Child Y’s DFG case, which has caused significant injustice to Mrs X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs X and complete a new assessment.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for her child, Child Y. She says the Council has delayed the process and Child Y has been left without access to downstairs toilet facilities in their home for over a year. Mrs X says the Council has now decided Child Y no longer needs downstairs toilet facilities but has failed to provide her with any information about how it reached this decision. Mrs X says all her attempts to request further information from the Council about this have been ignored since March 2023. Mrs X says the lack of a downstairs toilet at home continues to have a significant impact on Child Y.

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 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
5. 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

6. I have spoken to Mrs X and considered the evidence she has provided in support of her concerns.
7. I have considered the information the Council has provided in response to my enquiries.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Disabled Facilities Grants

9. A Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) is to provide adaptations and facilities to enable the disabled person to continue to live in their home. Grants are given by councils under Part I of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. If the person applying meets the qualifying criteria the council must award the grant.
10. Grants for children are not means-tested. Councils can decide to give more help if they think it is necessary. If an adaptation is required to meet an assessed need and the cost of the works will exceed the maximum grant available (currently £30,000), the remainder should be met either by the borough council using its discretionary powers or by social services departments at the county council under other legislation for example the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 and Childrens Act 1989.
11. A council must decide if the proposed works are necessary and appropriate to meet the needs of the disabled person. It must also be satisfied it is reasonable and practicable to carry out the works given the condition of the property to be adapted. Councils only approve grants for work they decide is necessary. An occupational therapist usually assesses need.
12. If a council refuses a grant, it must explain why. Reasons for which a council may refuse a grant can include where the council does not think the work is ‘necessary and appropriate’.
13. ‘Home Adaptations for Disabled People’ is key guidance on best practice in implementing DFGs. It says assessments for DFGs should take account of the views of the disabled child and their parents. Assessments should also consider the experience and expertise of professionals involved with the child.
14. Councils should decide a grant application as soon as reasonably practicable. This must be within six months of the application. The works should be completed within 12 months of the approval.
15. The Council’s DFG policy allows for appeals against decisions to the Executive Adaptations Board.

What happened

16. This is a timeline of key events and does not include everything that has happened.
17. Child Y has a range of conditions, including diagnoses for Chromosome Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Dyspraxia and Sensory Processing Disorder. They have significant difficulties with learning, speech, language and social communication. Child Y has difficulties with motor coordination and self-help skills. They also have gastro-intestinal problems, food allergies and can trouble with sleeping and their vision. At the time of Mrs X’s complaint, Child Y was being medically assessed for growth hormone deficiency, for which they have since started receiving treatment. Child Y can display challenging behaviour as a result of their needs. Child Y has an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) to support them at school.
18. In April 2020, the Council completed a Child in Need Assessment for Child Y and their family. This noted that Child Y might benefit from some adaptations to their home. In May 2021, a Council Occupational Therapist (OT) completed an assessment at Mrs X’s home and concluded Child Y needed the following three adaptations:
1. a level access shower on the first floor;
2. window restrictors to prevent escape; and,
3. ground floor toilet facilities.
19. The Council approved Mrs X’s DFG application for the above adaptations in July 2021. In November 2021, the case was taken back to the Council’s Special Needs Housing Panel as major works were needed in Child Y’s home to install a ground floor toilet. This included considerable works to the kitchen to make space for the toilet. The Panel noted other issues within Mrs X’s family which may have impacted on the progression of the adaptation works. The Panel decided to proceed with works to install the level access shower and window restrictors but felt it should wait before progressing works to install the ground floor toilet.
20. The level access shower and window restrictor works were completed in February 2022. In July 2022, the Council’s Surveyor told Mrs X further guidance was needed from an OT after Mrs X had provided further information about Child Y’s needs in respect of their vision being impaired.
21. In October 2022, a Council OT made a home visit to Mrs X and observed Child Y accessing the first floor toilet in the home without any obvious difficulty. The Council Surveyor and OT made a further visit to Mrs X’s home in November 2022.
22. From November 2022 and March 2023, there was ongoing correspondence between Mrs X, the Council Surveyor and the OT about devising a scheme of changes to the ground floor which best met Child Y’s needs. It appears no real agreement was reached on this issue as Mrs X asked to revert to the original changes proposed and the OT felt a more open plan layout was more appropriate.
23. In March 2023, Mrs X complained to the Council about the delay in progressing the DFG adaptations. At the same time, the Council’s Special Needs Housing Panel met again to consider whether Child Y still needed access to a ground floor toilet at home. The Panel asked the OT to obtain further information about Child Y’s current needs as it could not make a decision based on the information presented.
24. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint on 18 April 2023. It explained it no longer considered Child Y needed a ground floor toilet at home and would be asking the Special Need Housing Panel to make a final decision on whether the DFG offer for this should be withdrawn.
25. Mrs X brought her concerns about the Council’s handling to us shortly after this.

Analysis

26. In response to my enquiries in early September 2023, the Council explained it had yet to make a final decision in Child Y’s case.
27. It is not for the Ombudsman to say what Child Y’s needs are or what adaptations are needed to their home. That is the Council’s role. Our role is to determine whether there was any administrative fault in the way the Council reached its decision.
28. A council is entitled to refuse or withdraw a request for DFG funding if it is satisfied the adaptations are not necessary and appropriate. It must however be able to demonstrate it has made this decision based on all relevant information. I am not satisfied the Council has done so in this case based on the evidence I have seen.
29. This is for two reasons. Firstly, there was significant delay in the Council’s progression of the ground floor toilet works in Child Y’s case. The Council has said it paused progression of these works due to unrelated family difficulties Mrs X had highlighted. The Council has not however provided any evidence that it checked whether Mrs X still wished to proceed with the works to the ground floor of her home despite these unrelated issues. In response to my draft decision, Mrs X has confirmed she was unaware of the Council’s reasons until my investigation. Failure advise Mrs X or check whether she wished to proceed was fault which caused unnecessary delay and inconvenience to Child Y and their family.
30. The second is that in the context of adaptations for disabled children, the relevant government guidance states assessments should take account of the child’s views and those of their parents/carers. The assessment should consider the developmental needs of the child and their progress towards maximum independence, the needs of their parents as carers and the needs of any other children in the family.
31. In this case, the Council has not in my view provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate it took account of Mrs X’s views on Child Y’s behalf when it undertook the most recent OT assessment/review. The Council has not provided me or Mrs X with notes of the OT home visit in October 2022. There is no evidence to show Mrs X’s views about Child Y’s needs and presentation at home have been sought for the recent OT assessment. This is inconsistent with the original OT assessment in May 2021 in which Mrs X’s views and comments appear to form the basis of the Council’s assessment. Mrs X asked the Council to contact the professionals currently involved in Child Y’s care and it did not approach these professionals for information.
32. The Council instead seems to be basing its current position on information about Child Y’s presentation at school. This is despite the school advising the Council that Child Y’s family was best placed to advise on how their needs were managed in the home environment. I am not persuaded the Council has undertaken any meaningful assessment about whether Child Y’s needs have changed to the extent that they no longer require ground floor toilet facilities at home.
33. The Council’s continued delay to make a final decision on whether to withdraw funding for a downstairs toilet appears to be fault. The delay means Mrs X has been denied the opportunity to appeal the final decision with the Council’s Executive Adaptations Board if she disagrees with it.
34. The Council’s response to my enquiries has also failed to demonstrate it has sought to keep Mrs X informed of what has been happening since at least July 2022, when the Council Surveyor explained further OT advice was required as Child Y’s needs appeared to have changed. This is not in the spirit of government guidance which encourages councils to have regular contact with the disabled person or their carer/parent rather than waiting to be approached.
35. Based on the evidence seen, the Council is at fault. The injustice to Mrs X is that she cannot be satisfied any further Council decision-making in her child’s case will be made following consideration of all the relevant factors. Mrs X has been caused unnecessary frustration, time and trouble in seeking meaningful responses from the Council without success since July 2022. She has also been denied the opportunity to formally appeal any decision the Council makes about Child Y’s DFG, which creates avoidable uncertainty. It is entirely possible the outcome of the Council’s consideration might be to withdraw the funding originally offered, but that decision should be made in the right way and informed by an up-to-date assessment.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. Within one month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• make a written apology to Mrs X for the injustice caused by the faults identified in this statement;
• pay £750 to Mrs X in recognition of the frustration, distress and uncertainty caused to her by the faults identified in this statement; and,
• reconsider Mrs X’s request for DFG funding based on a new assessment. For this assessment the Council should obtain Mrs X’s views, and the views of professionals currently involved in Child Y’s care, about Child Y’s needs at home, specifically in relation to ground floor toilet facilities.

37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mrs X’s complaint. The Council’s faults have caused Mrs X injustice and it has agreed to take the recommended action to remedy that injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman