You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 October 2012
Date of Publication: 24 October 2012
Inspection Report published 24 October 2012 PDF | 80.09 KB

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 10 October 2012, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and talked with stakeholders.

Our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

Reasons for our judgement

Relatives told us that consent was gained before care and treatment was carried out. One relative said, “X had to go for a dental procedure and I got a written form to sign.” Relatives also said that staff respected people’s choices. One relative said, “There’s a lot of thought goes into the care. There’s lots of very different people live there and they always respect people’s different views and choices.”

During our visit, we saw examples of staff offering choices to people such as which drinks they preferred at mealtimes and what they would like to do during the day. In response to this last question, some people told staff they would like to go horse riding. Others wanted to stay in the home. Both needs were provided for. Staff told us that communication between themselves and people was important to them. If the wishes could not be expressed verbally, staff looked for non verbal signs of agreement. We saw evidence of this in practice and concluded that people were indeed asked for their consent and staff acted in accordance with their wishes.

We looked at three people’s care plans. We noted that these contained information which related to people’s ability to make their own decisions. We saw that assessments of their ability to make specific decisions had been carried out. These are known as mental capacity assessments. Where the assessment had determined that the person lacked capacity, records evidenced appropriate procedures had been followed to ensure they were protected. We concluded that if people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.