Recurring concern

Unreliable appeal and challenge routes for care decisions

First to latest report 12 Mar 2014 — 27 Apr 2018

Reports that mention this concern: 2
Times this concern has been raised: 2
Stated actions linked to this concern: 2

What this concern includes

Includes failures in dedicated arrangements allowing patients, carers or other affected people to challenge, appeal or obtain review of consequential care decisions, including care and funding decisions and changes to formal care plans.

What is not included

Excludes ordinary dissatisfaction or disagreement where an appropriate appeal or review route is available and functioning.
Excludes legal, administrative or regulatory appeals unrelated to consequential care decisions.
Excludes failures in the substance, implementation or communication of a care decision where no deficiency in the appeal, challenge or review route is identified.
Excludes generic complaints-handling failures unless the asserted concern specifically involves the right or opportunity to challenge or appeal a care decision.

Trends

Reports over time

Reports mentioning this concern, over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Edwards Duthie Shamash1

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust1

Southwark Safeguarding Children Partnership1

Swindon Borough Council1

Reports and published responses 2 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

27 Apr2018
Inner South London
Concerns raised1
1. Failure to provide a clear route or opportunity to challenge or appeal Care Plan changes
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
Stated actions 2
1. South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  Ensure young people and families review proposed Community Care Plans and agree or change them within four working weeks.
2. South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  Audit Community Care Plans changed after challenge or appeal and consider performance quarterly through CAMHS Directorate Operational Governance.
AI-generated summary

Katy Roberts · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Katy Roberts, who was aged 16, was under the care of CAMHS at SLAM when she died; the inquest concluded that her death was suicide. The report describes concerns that changes to her care plan were not confirmed in writing, that there was no clear route to challenge or appeal them, and that written routes for seeking help in emergencies and non-emergencies were not clearly communicated.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to provide a clear route or opportunity to challenge or appeal Care Plan changes
Wider context from the report
“(2) Failure to provide a clear route or opportunity to challenge or appeal these changes to the Care Plan. ”
Source location
Katy Roberts · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 1 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Ensure young people and families review proposed Community Care Plans and agree or change them within four working weeks.

Verbatim wording from the response
“CAMHS community practitioners will ensure that the Community Care Plan proposed is reviewed by the Young Person and their family and then either agreed, or changed, within 4 working weeks. The number of Community Care Plans changed, following challenge or appeal will be audited and performance considered by CAMHS Directorate Operational Governance meeting each Quarter.”

Source location
2018-0136-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley
Page 2 · response
Published 1 July 2018
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Audit Community Care Plans changed after challenge or appeal and consider performance quarterly through CAMHS Directorate Operational Governance.

Verbatim wording from the response
“CAMHS community practitioners will ensure that the Community Care Plan proposed is reviewed by the Young Person and their family and then either agreed, or changed, within 4 working weeks. The number of Community Care Plans changed, following challenge or appeal will be audited and performance considered by CAMHS Directorate Operational Governance meeting each Quarter.”

Source location
2018-0136-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley
Page 2 · response
Published 1 July 2018
Open published response
12 Mar2014
Wiltshire and Swindon
Concerns raised1
1. Lack of appeal routes for some care and funding decisions
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response

Swindon Borough Council
Respondent positions 1
1. Swindon Borough Council
  Existing exceptions-panel, complaints and continuing healthcare appeal arrangements are considered sufficient to address the reported lack of an appeal process.
  Existing arrangements considered sufficient
AI-generated summary

Wendy Bernadine BROWN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Wendy Bernadine BROWN had suffered from depression and had been the full-time carer of her severely disabled granddaughter. After a period of approximately 18 months without support or respite, Wendy died by hanging at her home during the late evening of 27 August into the morning of 28 August 2013. The concerns included delays and gaps in adult social care support, the adequacy of signposting and funding information, the timeliness of processing care applications, and the availability of appeal routes.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of appeal routes for some care and funding decisions
Wider context from the report
“c) I am also concerned that there appears to be no ability to appeal against your decision in some areas. CHC funding I was told does have an appeal route however other areas require a fresh application to be made with substantive new information. I would be grateful from the point of ensuring that the right decisions are made as to whether a review could look on this area as well please. The decisions you make impact greatly on carers lives and of course those that they care for. ”
Source location
Wendy Bernadine BROWN · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Existing exceptions-panel, complaints and continuing healthcare appeal arrangements are considered sufficient to address the reported lack of an appeal process.

Verbatim wording from the response
“5c) In this paragraph you make reference to the lack of appeal process with particular reference to CHC funding. As referred to above there is an exceptions panel made up with Senior Managers which deals with cases where resolution has not been achieved by the Verifications team with SEQOL. Should there be unresolved matters after exceptions panel has considered the matter then the Adult Social Care complaints procedure is available to Service users and Carers alike.”

Source location
2014-0113-Response-by-Swindon-Borough-Council
Page 3 · response
Published 12 March 2014
Open published response