Summary: Mr B complained, on behalf of his parents Mr and Mrs C, the Council delayed completing their carers assessments. Mr B said this delayed his parents receiving a carer's grant and his brothers’ care packages being increased by 10 hours each. We found fault with the Council for the delay in completing Mr and Mrs C’s carers assessment. The Council will make a financial payment to remedy the injustice caused by the delay and undertake service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained, on behalf of his parents Mr and Mrs C, the Council delayed completing their carers assessments. Mr B said this delayed his parents receiving a carer's grant and his brothers’ care packages being increased by 10 hours each.

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 a council’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

4. I considered:
• Mr and Mrs C’s complaint and the information Mr B provided;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
5. Mr B, Mr and Mrs C, and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft decision. I considered the comments I received before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and policy

6. A carer’s assessment is for carers over 18 years old who are looking after another adult over 18 years old who is disabled, ill or elderly.
7. Where it appears to a Council that a carer may have needs for support (whether currently or in the future), it must assess:
• whether the carer has needs for support (or is likely to do so in the future); and
• if the carer does, what those needs are (or are likely to be in the future). (Care Act 2014, Part 1, S10)
8. Forward Carers runs the Carers Hub which undertakes carers assessments for Birmingham City Council. Forward Carers works with 17 partners to deliver these services. Organisation 1 is one of its partners.
9. Organisations that are part of the Carer’s Hub use a well-being assessment to establish carer’s needs. The well-being assessment is underpinned by the Care Act 2014 but is not a statutory carer’s assessment. It is used when a carer does not want a statutory carer’s assessment or does not qualify for one.

What happened

10. Mr and Mrs C are full-time carers for two adult sons. Mr D and Mr E both have cerebral palsy and a learning disability. Mr C and Mrs C are supported to care for Mr D and Mr E by other family members.
11. In November 2018, the Council referred Mr B to the Carer’s Hub for support, help and guidance. The Carer’s Hub asked organisation 1 to complete the carer’s assessment for Mr B because it had a backlog. Organisation 1 met Mr B in December 2018 and agreed to complete carer’s assessments for Mr and Mrs C.
12. Organisation 1 arranged to meet Mr and Mrs C in January 2019. Mr C postponed the visit because Mrs C was unwell.
13. Two members of staff from organisation 1 visited Mr and Mrs C in February 2019 and completed well-being assessments. The organisation referred Mr and Mrs C for a moving and handling course. They gave Mr C and Mrs C information about support groups, community activities, residential breaks for carers and referred Mrs C to a support service for her health difficulties.
14. In April 2019, the Council’s occupational therapy service assessed Mr and Mrs C. It did not find any problems with their manual handling of Mr D and Mr E. It decided concerns about the suitability of their property would be addressed through the Disabled Facilities Grant application made in June 2018.
15. Mr B asked organisation 1 to complete statutory carer’s assessments for Mr and Mrs C in June 2019.
16. In July 2019, organisation 1 sent Mr B a list of possible dates for the carer’s assessments. In August 2019, Mr B apologised for not getting back to the organisation and asked for more dates.
17. In September 2019, organisation 1 told Mr B the worker assigned to Mr and Mrs C’s case was off sick and it would reallocate their case. It said there would be a delay in completing Mr and Mrs C’s assessment because its staff needed to be trained in the new carer’s assessment and eligibility criteria.
18. Mr B contacted organisation 1 for an update in October 2019. The organisation recommended the Council complete assessments for Mr and Mrs C.
19. Organisation 1 asked the Council to undertake the carer’s assessments for Mr and Mrs C. It explained it had been trying to complete the assessments for 10 months without success.
20. Mr B chased organisation 1 about his parent’s carer’s assessments again in November 2019. The organisation said it had spoken to the Council and it would complete the carer’s assessments. Mr B told organisation 1 to close his family’s file because he felt he had wasted a year trying to work with it.
21. The Council completed a carer's assessment with Mr and Mrs C in November 2019. The assessment recommended the Council:
• make a referral to occupational therapy to assess for equipment to assist with manual handling.
• give Mr and Mrs C a one-off well-being payment of £250 each to enable them to access activities that would help them to be able to continue with their caring roles.
• give Mr and Mrs C a well-being card to access well-being centres.
22. In November 2019, the Council’s occupational therapy service completed an assessment. The therapist decided that concerns raised about Mr and Mrs C and manual handling would be addressed by the adaptations being undertaken to their house through the Disabled Facilities Grant.
23. Mr B complained about the Council’s delay completing carer’s assessments for Mr and Mrs C. The Council responded at stage one of its complaint procedure. It said it understood Mr B contacted the Carer’s Hub directly with his concern about the delay and it said there was a waiting list because of demand for the service. It said the Carer’s Hub apologised for the delay. The Council confirmed it completed Mr and Mrs C’s carer’s assessments in November 2019. It agreed it took too long and it said it had discussed the matter with commissioning who would raise it with the Carer’s Hub.  
24. Mr B asked for a stage two response. The Council advised it discussed the delay with its commissioning team. The team said it would raise the matter with organisations undertaking carer’s assessments for the Council. The Council advised that during the period of delay Mr B had not raised the issue with it directly. It said without this knowledge, it would not have taken any action to ensure the carers assessments were undertaken. It apologised for the delay in the completion of the carer’s assessments and said it would continue to work with organisations to prevent such delays from occurring in the future.

Analysis

25. When a council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them. The Council has a duty to ensure carer’s assessments are completed without delay.
26. In December 2018, during Mr B’s carer’s assessment he asked organisation 1 to undertake assessments for his parents, Mr and Mrs C. Organisation 1 completed well-being assessments for Mr and Mrs C in February 2019. It signposted Mr and Mrs C to support services and made referrals where appropriate. Although these assessments were underpinned by the Care Act 2014, they were not statutory carer’s assessments.
27. Mr B asked organisation 1 to undertake statutory carers assessments for Mr and Mrs C in June 2019. The organisation did not have staff trained to complete these assessments. It referred Mr and Mrs C to the Council in November 2019. The Council completed the statutory carers assessments the same month. The delay between Mr B asking for carers assessments for Mr and Mrs C and the Council completing their statutory assessments was fault. As the Council is responsible for carers assessments, this delay was fault by the Council.
28. The fault caused Mr and Mrs C injustice because it delayed them receiving a well-being card and accessing well-being services. This was partly mitigated by the information given to Mr and Mrs C about community activities they could access. The Council will make a financial payment to Mr and Mrs C to acknowledge the delay in provision of this service.
29. Mr and Mrs C did not experience injustice because of the delayed occupational therapy referral. The occupational therapy’s November 2019 assessment found the adaptations to the family home through the Disabled Facilities Grant would address issues with manual handling.
30. Neither Mr C’s nor Mrs C’s carer’s assessments decided the Council should provide more support hours to their sons to support them as carers. The delay in the carer’s assessments did not impact on Mr D and Mr E’s support hours.

Agreed action

31. Within one month of the final decision the Council will pay Mr and Mrs C £100 each to recognise the loss of provision during the delay.
32. Within two months of the final decision the Council will review its commissioning arrangements for Forward Carers and the Carer’s Hub to ensure:
• mechanisms are in place to monitor whether statutory requirements under the Care Act 2014 are being met; and
• there is an escalation procedure that alerts the Council if statutory requirements are not being met.
33. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence these actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr and Mrs C’s complaint. Mr and Mrs C were caused an injustice by the actions of the Council. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman