You are here

Archived: Montrose Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 2 February 2012
Date of Publication: 23 May 2012
Inspection Report published 23 May 2012 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

Our judgement

People are not always involved in planning their care and treatment. Staff did not always deliver care in a dignified, person-centred way to promote independence.

Overall Montrose Care Home was not meeting this essential standard.

User experience

We spoke with one person who said the carers "are very good, they look after me well". Another person told us that the carers do not have time to explain anything.

One person we spoke with looked well cared for with clean colour coordinated clothes and hair neat and with manicured nails. We spoke with five women who had excessive facial hair which appeared undignified.

We observed carer workers interacting with people speaking caringly and respectfully. For example two carer workers were transferring a person in a hoist and throughout the procedure they spoke with the person providing reassurance and telling them what they were doing.

A person we spoke with told us they were involved in the initial care planning process for their relative.

Other evidence

We reviewed four care records and found evidence of only one of these people being involved in the assessment and planning of the care and support required.

We spoke with three carer workers and they told us they understood about involving people in making decisions about their care and support. However they told us that often they were not able to accommodate people’s requests or promote their independence because they were too rushed. For example they told us it was quicker to use a wheelchair rather than offer to support a person to walk.