Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care support during a respite stay in a residential care home. This is because the Care Provider has thoroughly investigated and responded to the complaint, and it is unlikely we could add to that investigation or reach a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr D says the Care Provider failed to give acceptable care to his relative, Ms E during a two-week respite stay. During this short time Ms E’s health declined and within hours of leaving the care home Ms E was found to have Covid. Ms E went to hospital and died shortly after. Mr D is left with many questions about the care provided to Ms E and worries about the safety of other residents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the action has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms E lived at home with Mr D. Mr D was struggling with his caring role so arranged a two-week respite break at Mellish House Residential home, run by Stour Sudbury Limited (the Care Provider).
6. After the two weeks Mr D took Ms E to another care home. Shortly after Ms E’s admission the care home said she had Covid-19, and low oxygen levels; Ms E was admitted to hospital.
7. The Care Provider has thoroughly investigated and responded to Mr D’s concerns. The Care Provider took Ms E's oxygen levels within the two hours before she left and there was no issue. There was nothing to suggest to the Care Provider that Ms E was unwell with Covid-19 at that time or needed medical attention. I note Mr D collected Ms E and does not appear to have had a concern that she was unwell other than a decline in her weight and mobility.
8. There is no evidence to suggest the decline in Ms E’s health was caused by the actions of the Care Provider rather than a result of her health conditions. The Care Provider involved relevant professionals in Ms E’s support, such as a GP, dietician, Speech and Language therapy and the dementia support team. The Care Provider also made referrals to the Care Quality Commission and local safeguarding authority following Mr D’s complaint, which is appropriate action to consider any risk to other residents.
9. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to the Care Provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome as we rely on the available evidence of the care records and the witness statements.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add to the Care Provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome. Although it is upsetting for Mr D and he has outstanding questions, that would not justify an Ombudsman investigation. Especially where it is unlikely we could achieve any worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman