Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate a complaint about social care provided under section 117 of the Mental Health Act. This is because the information we have seen suggests the assessment the Council completed was in line with expected standards and we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains Nottinghamshire County Council (the Council) is not providing him with adequate care to meet his needs. His mother, Ms X is acting as his representative to help him make this complaint. Ms X says the Council completed assessments based on discussions with Mr Y when he was without support from family of carers. Ms X considers the Council manipulated answers to reduce the level of care provision for Mr Y. Ms X says the Council ignored a request from Mr Y’s GP to provide him with daily care.
2. Ms X says she wants the Council to increase Mr Y’s care package to 30-hours a week and then monitor it to see if this provides the right level of support.

Back to top

The Ombudsmen’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsmen provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. They may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if they believe it is unlikely they would find fault or they cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 3(2) and Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. The Ombudsmen cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended, and Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, sections 3(4)- 3(7))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant, his representative and the organisations complained about.
6. Councils and Integrated care Boards (ICBs) have joint responsibilities in the delivery of section 117 aftercare. The Ombudsmen therefore name both organisations in complaints about section 117 aftercare. In this case, the Council managed and provided the care complained about. We will share the decision statement with the ICB for information purposes.
7. Mr Y and Ms X had an opportunity to comment on a draft decision statement and I considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

8. Mr Y was eligible for section 117 aftercare after he was admitted to hospital under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (the MHA) several years earlier. He is no longer under the care of mental health services, but still receives social care support. Although he has since moved out of area, the Council still provides the social care support under section 117 funding.
9. Mr Y was previously in supported accommodation but for the past few years he has lived in his own home as a private tenant.
10. In October 2021 Mr Y’s GP wrote to the Council at Ms X’s request. The GP said they had concerns that Mr Y was not looking after himself and that this could affect his mental health. He asked the Council to consider increasing the number of hours support Mr Y received. The Council increased the hours temporarily until it could complete a full care needs assessment. The assessment took place in Mr Y’s home in February 2022. Mr Y, his carer, Ms X and the social worker were present for the assessment.
11. The assessment considered Mr Y’s needs and how to address these. Ms X says much the form was cut and pasted from previous assessments, however, the content is likely to be similar as the assessments are all considering Mr Y’s needs. The relevant point is whether this assessment considered Mr Y’s needs properly in this assessment.
12. The record of the assessment shows the social worker considered Mr Y’s needs based on discussion with him and his family. This shows the assessment was person centred. The information the social worker recorded indicates an understanding of Mr Y’s needs and it notes he understood and agreed with the assessment. There was consideration of Mr Ys mental capacity (ability to understand discussions around his needs) which was clearly recorded. Mr Y was considered to have capacity in relation to his care needs.
13. We cannot find fault just because there is disagreement with the outcomes. I consider the assessment shows the Council gathered enough information to make an informed decision. The outcomes were professional judgement, but based on the information I have seen, the social worker completed the assessment in line with expected standards, as set out in the Care and Support statutory guidance. The Council reached a decision on the information gathered from those present at the assessment.
14. Additionally, the outcome that Ms X is seeking is not achievable through an Ombudsmen investigation. She wants the Council to provide 30 hours support and then monitor and reduce until the right level is achieved. Care packages are agreed based on someone’s assessed needs. Although Mr Y had 30 hours support previously, this was when he had greater assessed care needs and was in supported accommodation.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsmen will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s assessment in February 2021 or achieve the outcomes Mr Y and Ms X are seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman