The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how Mr X’s Shared Lives carer treated him. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the response the Council has already provided.
The complaint
The complainant, Mrs Y, complained on behalf of Mr X, who is her brother-in-law. Mrs Y was concerned about the way Mr X’s Shared Lives carer treated him. Mrs Y’s complaint included bullying, failing to properly care for Mr Y, and failing to arrange appropriate medical care for Mr Y.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
Shared Lives schemes provide an alternative to traditional social care accommodation and support for adults. Under Shared Lives schemes service users who cannot live independently receive care and support from ordinary family households called Shared Lives carers.
Mr X lived with a Shared Lives carer for seven years but is now accommodated elsewhere. Mrs Y complained to the Council about an alleged deterioration of the care Mr X received. In its responses to Mrs Y the Council said.
Mrs Y had asked that a social worker did not interview Mr X in case it upset him. But there was no evidence Mr X had been bullied by his Shared Lives carer or that he was frightened of her. No other complaints had been submitted in the previous seven years.
There was an incident when the Shared Lives carer spoke over Mr X during a telephone call - but they did not consider their behaviour to be aggressive.
There was no evidence the Shared Lives carer had used inappropriate language about Mr X’s toileting habits.
The Shared Lives carer arranged for a full blood count and urine sample to be taken every three months and the evidence supported this.
The Shared Lives carer had sent Mr X to bed at 5pm on one occasion due to a problem with his leg. This was considered acceptable.
There was no evidence the Shared Lives carer had not arranged proper medical care for a problem with Mr X’s leg.
There was no evidence to support the allegation the Shared Lives carer had slapped Mr X and told him not to tell anyone about this.
Actions had, however, been taken, including extra support and monitoring, increased virtual contact, and a return to home visits. Extra guidance had also been issued.
Assessment I understand how concerned Mrs Y is by the issues which are at the heart of her complaint. But we will not start an investigation. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the response Mrs Y has already received.
The Council has considered Mrs Y’s complaints and, where possible, spoken to those involved. The Council has considered the evidence and records available and responded to the points Mrs Y has raised. The Council has set out the changes it has made following Mrs Y’s complaint. Without independent witnesses to support what Mrs Y says, it is unlikely that if we did investigate, we would reach different conclusions to the Council’s. Because Mr X no longer lives with the Shared Lives carer there are no changes we could recommend which would directly affect him. We will not therefore investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add anything to the response the Council has already provided.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman