Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the care assessment the Council completed for her daughter and that the Council has refused to provide the care and support her daughter needs. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the care assessment the Council completed for her daughter. She says the Council has refused to provide the care and support her daughter needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils must carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. If a council decide a person has eligible needs, it must set out how it will meet those needs in a care and support plan.
7. The Council completed a care assessment for Mrs X’s daughter, Ms Z, in February 2023. This assessment identified Ms Z had eligible needs. The Council also completed a care and support plan for Ms Z, which outlined what care and support would be provided to meet her eligible needs. The Council’s offer was for four hours of care and support, to be provided as a direct payment to allow Ms Z to employ a personal assistant.
8. Mrs X is unhappy with this offer as she considers her daughter needs 168 hours of support each week. She is also unhappy the Council has refused to provide a support dog.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we cannot overturn the Council’s decision unless there was fault in the way it reached its decision. Our role is to look at the process an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
10. In this case, the Council has followed the correct process before deciding how much care and support to provide to Ms Z. I have reviewed the care assessment and have found no evidence to suggest it was not completed properly. Therefore, the Council is allowed to reach a decision on how much care and support is necessary to meet Ms Z’s assessed eligible needs.
11. Regarding the support animal, the care assessment does note that Ms Z could benefit from having one. However, it notes that this can be accessed through the NHS and that Ms Z would need to speak with her GP about a referral for this support. It is open to Mrs X to do this.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman