Reviewing, Suspending and Ending a Standard Authorisation

1. Grounds for Review

There are 3 possible grounds for review, as set out below;

The non-qualification ground

The supervisory body must carry out a review if it believes, or has been notified that any of the following qualifying requirements are no longer met;

  1. The age requirement;
  2. The mental health requirement;
  3. The mental capacity requirement;
  4. The best interest requirement;
  5. The no refusals requirement; and
  6. The eligibility requirement (in respect of paragraph 5 schedule 1A only).

The change of reason ground

The supervisory body must carry out a review if it believes, or has been notified that;

  1. Even though the person may still meet the qualifying requirements;
  2. There have been changes to the reasons that they meet the qualifying requirements.

Variation of conditions ground

The Best Interests requirement only is reviewable on the ground that;

  1. There has been a change in the person’s case; and
  2. Because of that change, it would be appropriate to amend, withdraw or include a condition in the standard authorisation.

2. When a Review must be carried out

The power to review

The supervisory body has the power to carry out a review of a standard authorisation at any time.

When a review must be carried out

A review must be carried out when it eligible for review (based on the grounds for review) and is requested by;

  1. The relevant person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR); or
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital.

When a review must be requested by the managing authority

The managing authority must request a general review if they believe that one or more of the qualifying requirements may no longer be met.

When a review cannot be carried out

A review must not be carried out when;

  1. There are no grounds for review; or
  2. The standard authorisation is currently suspended; or
  3. The current authorisation is due to end and the managing authority of the care home or hospital has already made a request for a new standard authorisation.

Declining to review

The supervisory body can decline to carry out a review if none of the grounds for review appear to be met unless it has been directed to carry out a review by the Court of Protection.

3. Carrying out a Review

Notifying others that a review is being carried out

The supervisory body must notify the following people that a review is being carried out, preferably before it starts;

  1. The relevant person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR); and
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital.

Carrying out the review

The supervisory body must carry out a separate review assessment of each qualifying requirement that has changed, or no longer exists.

The same obligations and powers apply when carrying out the review as applied when originally assessing the qualifying requirements to grant the standard authorisation unless the review is a non-assessable Best Interests requirement review (see below). These are;

  1. The obligation to appoint a suitable person to review each requirement;
  2. Where relevant, the obligation to appoint different persons to review the mental health requirement and the Best Interest requirement;
  3. The right of the reviewer to examine and take copies of relevant records;
  4. The obligation to make a written record of all review assessments;
  5. The obligation to provide review assessment records to the supervisory body;
  6. The obligation to provide review assessment records to the relevant person, the Relevant Person’s Representative, the managing authority and any section 39A IMCA; and
  7. The obligation to consider information provided, or submissions made by any Relevant Person’s Representative, section 39A IMCA, section 39C IMCA or section 39D IMCA when making any determination.

Non-assessable Best Interest requirement review

If the Best Interest requirement is to be reviewed there is no need to carry out a further assessment if;

  1. The ground for review is on the ‘variations of condition’ ground only; and
  2. The change in the relevant person’s case is not significant.

4. The Outcome of the Review

As per the original assessment process, for each qualifying requirement that is reviewed the assessors must determine whether the outcome if ‘positive’ or ‘negative’.

Positive conclusion

A positive conclusion means that, regardless of any change in circumstances the person still meets the qualifying requirement.

Negative conclusion

A negative conclusion means that the person no longer meets that qualifying requirement.

Positive conclusion: Best Interests review assessment

A positive conclusion regarding Best Interests is reached when the supervisory body has;

  1. Carried out a review assessment that has determined that the Best Interests qualifying requirement is still met (unchanged reasons); or
  2. Carried out a review assessment that has determined that the Best Interests qualifying requirement is still met (although the reasons have changed); or
  3. Reviewed the conditions of the standard authorisation without a review assessment.

If the reasons that the Best Interest requirement is met have changed the supervisory body must vary the standard authorisation so that it states the current reason the requirement is met.

If the conditions of the authorisation only have been reviewed the supervisory body can proceed to make changes to the conditions of the standard authorisation as it deems necessary.

Positive conclusion: All other qualifying requirements

A positive conclusion for any qualifying requirement other than the Best Interests requirement is reached when the supervisory body has;

  1. Carried out a review assessment that has determined the qualifying requirement is still met (unchanged reasons); or
  2. Carried out a review assessment that has determined the qualifying requirement is still met (although reasons have changed).

In each case, if the reasons that the requirement is met have changed the supervisory body must vary the standard authorisation so that it states the current reason the requirement is met.

Negative conclusion: All qualifying requirements

A negative conclusion for any qualifying requirement is reached when the supervisory body has carried out a review assessment that has determined the qualifying requirement is no longer met.

In this instance the supervisory body must terminate the standard authorisation with immediate effect.

Notifying others of the outcome

When the review is complete, the supervisory body must give notice to all of the following;

  1. The relevant person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR);
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital; and
  4. Any section 39D IMCA.
The notice must state the outcome of the review, and any variation made to the standard authorisation.

5. Written Records

The supervisory body must keep written records of the following information;

  1. Each request made for a review;
  2. The outcome of each request;
  3. Each review they carry out;
  4. The outcome of each review they carry out; and
  5. Any variations made to authorisations as a consequence of review.

6. Varying the Authorisation

Varying the authorisation

A standard authorisation can only be varied;

  1. Subject to a review under Part 8 of the schedule; or
  2. Subject to a review under section 21A of the Mental Capacity Act; or
  3. Under direction of the Court of Protection at any time.

If the relevant person moves

If a standard authorisation is already in place and there is a plan to move the relevant person from one care home or hospital to another the managing authority of the care home or hospital where the relevant person will be moving to has a duty to request a standard authorisation.

If a new standard authorisation is granted by the supervisory body the old authorisation ceases to exist from the date that the new authorisation begins (the day that the relevant person moves).

The power of the Court to amend or withdraw an authorised Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard

Under section 21A of the Mental Capacity Act the relevant person and the Relevant Person’s Representative have the right to request the Court of Protection review a standard authorisation at any time. The Court of Protection must consider all requests.

The Court also has the power to review any standard or urgent DoLS authorisation at any time that it deems it in the relevant person’s Best Interests to do so, regardless of any request to do so having been made or not.

The Court can question;

  1. In the case of standard authorisations, whether the relevant person still meets the qualifying requirements;
  2. In the case of standard authorisations, the conditions upon which the authorisation was given;
  3. In all cases, the period of which the authorisation has been, or will be in force;
  4. In all cases, the purpose for which the authorisation was given; and
  5. In the case or urgent authorisations, whether the urgent authorisation should have been given at all.

Following a review of the authorisation the Court has powers to;

  1. Vary or terminate a standard or urgent authorisation;
  2. Direct (order) the supervisory body to vary or terminate a standard authorisation; or
  3. Direct the managing authority to vary or terminate an urgent authorisation.

Complying with conditions

The managing authority must comply with any and all changes to the conditions in the authorisation following review.

7. Suspending a Standard Authorisation

A standard authorisation can only be suspended if the relevant person no longer meets the eligibility requirement of the qualifying requirements because of a change in their mental health status.

Click here for further information about the eligibility requirement.

It is the responsibility of the managing authority to notify the supervisory body that the relevant person no longer meets the eligibility requirement.

Upon receiving notification the supervisory body must suspend the authorisation.

The supervisory body must notify the following people that the authorisation is suspended;

  1. The person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR); and
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital.

A standard authorisation can only be suspended for 28 days, after which period it must either recommence or end, subject to a further request.

No reviews of a standard authorisation can take place during a period of suspension.

It is the role of the managing authority to monitor whether the person becomes eligible again and to notify the supervisory body. Upon being notified the supervisory body must recommence the authorisation and notify;

  1. The person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR);
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital; and
  4. Any section 39D IMCA.

8. Ending a Standard Authorisation

When a standard authorisation must end

A standard authorisation must end on the date specified on the authorisation unless the date is;

  1. Bought forward following a review;
  2. Bought forward by the direction of the Court of Protection; or
  3. Extended following a review (up to a maximum total period of 12 months); or
  4. Extended by the direction of the Court of Protection (up to a maximum total period of 12 months).

Written confirmation that a standard authorisation has ended

As soon as possible after ending it the supervisory body must notify the following people in writing;

  1. The relevant person;
  2. The Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR);
  3. The managing authority of the care home or hospital; and
  4. Every interested party consulted by the Best Interests Assessor.

Renewing authorisations

There is no process for renewing a standard authorisation or extending it past a total period of 12 months.

If the managing authority is of the view that the relevant person continues to be deprived of their liberty and continues to meet the qualifying requirements under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards a further request for a standard authorisation must be made.

When the request for another standard authorisation is received, the supervisory body does not have to carry out new assessments to determine that qualifying requirements are met, as long as;

  1. Written copies of all previous assessments are available;
  2. Previous assessments were carried out within the last 12 months;
  3. Previous assessments comply with current requirements; and
  4. There is no reason why previous assessments are no longer relevant.

If the previous assessment in question is a Best Interest assessment the supervisory body must take into account any subsequent written or verbal submissions made by;

  1. Any Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR);
  2. Any section 39C IMCA; or
  3. Any section 39D IMCA.

If the relevant person moves

If a standard authorisation is already in place and there is a plan to move the relevant person from one care home or hospital to another the managing authority of the care home or hospital where the relevant person will be moving to has a duty to request a standard authorisation.

If a new standard authorisation is granted by the supervisory body the old authorisation ceases to exist from the date that the new authorisation begins (the day that the relevant person moves).

tri.x procedures