A complaint from the daughter of a disabled woman against Trafford council over the way changes to her mother's care package were handled has been upheld by the local government and social care Ombudsman. The authority has apologised to the two women and paid them £250 each in compensation for the 'distress caused by the fault'.
In October 2021, daughter 'Mrs B' complained that she had not been informed by the council that 'Agency 1' had given notice to quit giving care to mum 'Mrs D' on September 16 - the names of individuals and organisations in the report are redacted. The council then failed to inform Mrs B that 'Agency 2' had been commissioned to provide care.
She only found out when a man turned up at her mum's flat on September 27, 2021. Prior to this Mrs D - who also suffered mental health problems - had requested to be given care only by female workers.
From that date, Mrs D did not receive any care from the council and the family had to provide care and assistance, the Ombudsman's findings said.
The council did not respond to Mrs B's complaint until April 4 this year when the process under which a care package should be terminated was explained.
"[In such circumstances] the commissioning team will inform the social work team of the termination," the judgement said. "The social worker will then inform the person affected and address any issues with the care package.
"The social worker then asks the commissioning team to find a new provider. Once a new provider has been found, the commissioning team informs the social worker, who then informs the person affected."
The Ombudsman said there was no evidence of communication between the social workers and the commissioning team in Mrs D's case.
He went on: "The social work team was not informed of what happened so the social worker did not inform Mrs B or Mrs D.
"The commissioning team said there had been communication with Mrs B but could not provide evidence of the communication."
The council contacted Agency 2 which said 'it was unknown that male carers were considered unsuitable, adding that they would never knowingly subject anyone to a situation that would cause distress'.
Since this case, Trafford council has recommended that discussions with people who need care and their families should be 'prioritised for case recording'.
"The current policy and procedures for changes in care providers should be reviewed to ensure sufficient information was shared," the Ombudsman said.
"I asked the council to send me the assessment of Mrs D's needs and care plan which were in place in September 2021. The council has sent me one document which I presume is a combined assessment plan. This does not mention the fact that Mrs D should only be supported by female workers."
The Ombudsman highlighted 'significant delay' in the council's response to Mrs B's complaint. "Mrs B complained on October 1 2021 and the council did not respond until April 4 2022," he said. "This was fault.
"There was fault in the council's communication with Mrs B and Mrs D. The council failed to follow its own process for the change in agency.
"This was made worse by the fact that the council knew that Mrs B wanted to be involved in the sourcing of the new agency and did not involve her at all.
"I note that the council did not inform Agency 2 that Mrs D could only be supported by female workers.
"The case notes of April 2 2019 and October 16 2020 show that the council was informed of this requirement, so the council should have informed Agency 2 of this. Its failure to do so was fault."
He said the fault led to 'an injustice' for Mrs B and Mrs D as an unknown man turned up to Mrs D's home without any notice.
The Ombudsman went on: "I accept that this caused distress to Mrs B and Mrs D. This also partly contributed to the breakdown of communication with Agency 2 and Agency 2 [later] withdrawing its offer to provide care.
"Alternative offers of care were made after October 2021, but I accept that, until those offers were made, there was injustice to Mrs B and Mrs D."
The ombudsman said the council had already made service improvement recommendations as a result of the complaint investigation and therefore did not suggest any further improvements.
READ NEXT:
