Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council assessed and then decided on the support it would provide to Mrs X’s child. It is unlikely we would find any fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X was unhappy with how the Council assessed her child’s (Y’s) needs as part of a disabled child assessment. She also disagreed with how the Council decided to remove some of the provision, particularly the short break package. Mrs X said this means Y now feels more isolated and it has caused her family additional stress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. 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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. Mrs X was unhappy with several aspects of an assessment the Council completed in relation to Y. She said it was poorly written and did not fully take account of a change in her circumstances. She also disagreed with the decision-making panel who removed part of Y’s provision.
7. I have considered the Council’s explanation of how it assessed Y’s needs, including the fact it gave Mr and Mrs X the opportunity to comment and provide their views. It also met with and took advice from staff at Y’s school, who were involved with their education and support. Given the Council’s explanations here, it is unlikely we would find fault in how it assessed Y’s needs.
8. Mrs X was also concerned the Panel’s decision was wrong when it looked at Y’s assessment, including the fact that it did not take into account updated information. The Council replied and explained it had considered all the information. It also gave Mrs X an explanation for why it decided to remove some provision, based upon it’s assessment of where it saw an unmet need.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the way the Council made its decision. If we consider it applied its mind properly to a decision, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
10. Noting the Council’s explanations about how it decided, it is unlikely if we were to investigate, we would find fault. And in any case, we could not direct the Council to put a package of support in place in the way Mrs X has expressed a wish for it to do in relation to outreach support.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman