Summary: Mr B complained the Council delayed in carrying out an adult social care assessment of his needs. And when it was done it did not accurately reflect his needs or provide the necessary support. He said this meant he did not have support for his physical needs and also with his housing situation. There was fault by the Council in how it responded when Mr B first approached. It will apologise and make a payment to him. It will also review its procedures.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Mr B. He complained the Council delayed in carrying out an adult social care assessment of his needs. And when it was done it did not accurately reflect his needs or provide the necessary support. He said this meant he did not have support for his physical needs and also with his housing situation.

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 the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the relevant law and guidance

5. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require local authorities to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to all people regardless of their finances or whether the local authority thinks an individual has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
6. The Council must carry out the assessment over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Local authorities should tell the individual when their assessment will take place and keep the person informed throughout the assessment.
7. The format of the assessment can be flexible and should be appropriate and proportionate to the person. It should help the individual to understand their situation, needs, strengths and capabilities, and the support available to them in the community or through other networks and services. But the guidance requires that the Council provides in advance, and in accessible format, the list of questions to be covered in the assessment

The Council’s policy

8. The Council says it requires Personalised Strength Based assessments are carried out in a timely way. Training regarding assessment of needs under the Care Act is provided to all staff. Staff use a required Assessment format which is entered on an electronic recording system.

What happened

9. Mr B was living in a house in multiple occupation. In October 2019 he wrote to the Council. He explained the difficulties he was facing and asked for an assessment and support. It is unclear exactly what happened but the Council contacted mental health services. Mr B wrote again a month later repeating his request. Again the Council contacted mental health services. At the end of December mental health services wrote to the Council saying it should carry out a social care needs assessment of Mr B.
10. In January 2021 Mr B complained to the Council. The main point he was making was that he needed a social care assessment. The Council did then assess Mr B and that was completed in early March.
11. Mr B had been served with an eviction notice so the social worker who completed the assessment (Officer X) made a homelessness referral to the homelessness section and referred him to housing advice services. It was decided that because of the Government’s suspension of evictions because of the COVID-19 pandemic Mr B was not threatened with homelessness.
12. Officer X wrote on Mr B’s behalf asking for the decision to be reviewed. The Council confirmed its decision that he was not threatened with homelessness.
13. Mr B was not happy with the social care assessment and approached solicitors who contacted the Council. I am unaware of any further contact from the solicitors with the Council.
14. At the end of April Officer X was named as Mr B’s social worker. There was a meeting with Mr B, Officer X and other professionals in early May. Mr B wanted to live in a different Council area, Council R, and it was agreed that Officer X would contact that Council. It was also agreed that Mr B would be referred to a mental health charity for advocacy support particularly with his housing needs. It was also agreed that the social care assessment would be reviewed.
15. There was a further meeting later in June. Mr B agreed to be supported to find private sector housing in Council R. The Council started to look at arranging funding to support Mr B to move. And at the beginning of July a private sector property in Council R was found. The Council invited Mr B to attend a meeting to discuss the options and way forward.
16. Mr B did not attend the meeting because he said he needed the revised care needs assessment first. Mr B then wrote saying he no longer wanted to be involved with the team.
17. There was some further contact between Officer X and the advocate who had been found for Mr B but there was no further substantive action.

Analysis

The request for an assessment

18. Mr B was clearly asking for support in his correspondence in October 2019. There were grounds for the Council to consider that there may be involvement from the mental health team. But what seems to have happened is the Council did not progress the request for a social care assessment because it referred Mr B to mental health services. This was fault. Mr B clearly had the appearance of need for care and support and that meant the Council should have addressed itself to how it could assess Mr B.
19. This failing meant the assessment of Mr B was delayed by probably two months. Given what happened when Mr B was assessed it would not have made a significant practical difference to Mr B’s position but it would have saved him some distress.

The assessment

20. Mr B considered the first assessment was inadequate and did not properly reflect his needs. He had been bereaved while the assessment was being completed and under a lot of stress so felt it had not captured all his history and needs. The Council agreed to review the assessment. The revised assessment reflected Mr B’s comments in detail.
21. It was helpful the Council agreed to review the assessment given Mr B’s concerns but the original was not in itself flawed. It was based on four sessions with Mr B and it was a fair reflection of the information the officer gathered.

Action by the Council

22. The key issue here was Mr B’s housing situation. The Council’s assessment of his social care needs recognised the problems with the accommodation and it acted to try to find alternative accommodation for him. The social worker had direct contact with the homelessness team and requested a review of the decision. They said Mr B could make an application to the housing register. This investigation was not considering the Council’s decision on Mr B’s threatened homelessness but the Council’s action under its adult social care duties. There was no fault in how the Council carried out those duties.
23. When Mr B’s housing situation was not resolved the Council arranged for an advocate to support Mr B and also agreed to fund a deposit for a private sector property. It identified a potentially suitable property in Mr B’s preferred area of Council R. Mr B decided not to pursue that. Initially because he had not had the revised needs assessment. But when he had received that he still did not want to pursue it.
24. The Council had also discussed the possibility of supported accommodation with Mr B but he did not want to consider that. The
25. Mr B is entitled to make the decisions he did about the support he wanted with his housing situation. But I do not consider there has been any fault by the Council in the support it provided to Mr B with his housing situation as part of its social care duties.
26. In addition to the events outlined above the Council contacted and spoke to the agent managing the property about some of Mr B’s concerns about the property. That was an appropriate response.

Complaint handling

27. Mr B complained to the Council in January. The Council did not deal with this as a complaint but as a ‘representation’ and referred to it as a pre-complaint. It is the case that by this point the Council was going to carry out a care needs assessment but this did not address Mr B’s complaint. He was saying he had been requesting an assessment for sometime and it had not been done. The Council should have considered this as a complaint at that point.
28. This failing will have increased Mr B’s frustration.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. The Council will apologise to Mr B for the faults found and pay him £300 for the distress caused to him. It will do this within a month of the final decision.
30. The Council will also:
• consider what happened when Mr B first approached and take steps to ensure it properly considers any request for adult social care support in the future; and
• ensure that complaints are not dismissed without proper consideration.

It will complete these actions within two months of the final decision and tell us of the action taken.

Back to top

Final decision

31. There was fault that caused injustice to Mr B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman