A watchdog has rapped County Hall after advice from a senior mental health nurse over the care of a woman with dementia was ignored - to save money.
A complaint by the woman's daughter over the care provided by Norfolk County Council has been upheld, after an investigation by the Local Government and Social Care ombudsman.
The ombudsman said the council "placed more importance on the cost of the care package than on its knowledge of Mrs X’s wellbeing" and ordered the authority to apologise.
What happened?
Referred to as Mrs X in the ombudsman report, the woman at the centre of the complaint had dementia and had been looked after by her husband.
But in 2022 her husband became ill and died, by which time Mrs X had lost "a considerable amount of weight".
The family enlisted a care agency to provide two hours of care each night to encourage her to eat and to provide company.
She was referred to the county council which carried out an assessment, with a social worker saying the rate charged by the agency was "well above" what the authority usually paid.
The council, which has been wrestling with multi-million-pound budget gaps, looked into alternative providers. But Mrs X's daughter stressed her mother's dementia meant there was a need for only a very small group of known carers.
A senior mental health nurse who assessed Mrs X confirmed she needed "consistency of care".
She said: "Being supported by the carers she knows well may facilitate (Mrs X) accepting care and help and having a routine is very important to her."
Mrs X's daughter agreed to allow a second care agency to provide care, so long as it was initially for just one call a day so her mother was not confused.
But two members of staff from the new agency, Norwich-based CompKey, turned up unannounced to carry out an assessment and look round the house.
Mrs X's daughter was unhappy with the care then provided, which she said led to her mother's condition deteriorating.
Her mother later went into a care home where her daughter said her condition had improved.
READ MORE: Top council officers make admission over 'let down' family
What the watchdog said
The ombudsman found shortcomings and ordered the council to apologise, to offer the family £1,000 and to review what had happened.
They said: "The council's decision to change Mrs X's care agency despite the recommendation of a senior mental health nurse about consistency of care had a detrimental effect on her stability.
"The overriding impression left by the language used is that it placed more importance on the cost of the care package than on its knowledge of Mrs X’s wellbeing."
Response from the council and CompKey
Alison Thomas, cabinet member for adult social services at Norfolk County Council, said: "We accept the finding of the ombudsman and are sorry for the distress and disruption caused to this individual.
"We have already taken steps to reinforce our person-centred working to ensure the wellbeing of service users is placed at the heart of decision-making.
"In some cases, professionals may offer differing advice as the best approach for an individual's care, particularly given the requirements of the Care Act and consideration of the budgetary challenges we are facing.
"Since this situation, we are working more closely with partners to ensure a variety of opinions are considered."
Humphrey Moyo, managing director of CompKey, based in Stevenson Road, Norwich, said: "I would like to sincerely express my sympathy to Mrs X."
He said CompKey had been hampered by a lack of handover between the two care agencies looking after her.
He said: "There are bound to be mistakes in every place of work, surely, but I need to emphasize that the carers did not do anything harmful to Mrs X.
"The carers worked so hard in general, during those few days that we were able to assist Mrs X."
Steve Morphew, leader of the Labour group at Norfolk County Council, said: "Not surprisingly the ombudsman seems to be taking a close interest in Norfolk adult social care.
"Beneath the examples that make the media and the ombudsman there will be others who have been treated unfairly it unjustly who give up, don't have the capacity or don't know the rules.
"This is another example of a system failure, not an honest mistake."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel