Further assessment was needed to determine health care funding

Summary 566 |

Miss T complained that the Clinical Commissioning Group did not properly review her mother's eligibility for continuing healthcare funding.


What happened

The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) received a request from Mrs T's daughter, Miss T, for a retrospective review of Mrs T's eligibility for continuing healthcare funded care. It did a checklist assessment in line with the national standards.

The CCG concluded that there was not enough evidence to show that Mrs T should undergo a further, more detailed assessment of her needs.

What we found

The CCG failed to consider all the relevant evidence properly. It did not see that Mrs T should have had another assessment, a decision support tool (DST) assessment, for each of the retrospective care periods it was reviewing.

Putting it right

The CCG agreed to conduct DST assessments for each of the retrospective review periods in question.

Health or Parliamentary
Health
Organisations we investigated

North Derbyshire CCG

Location

Derbyshire

Complainants' concerns ?

Did not apologise properly or do enough to put things right

Result

Taking steps to put things right