You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 29 October 2012
Date of Publication: 23 November 2012
Inspection Report published 23 November 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)

Meeting 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

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 29 October 2012, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The service was meeting this standard. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

People's care plans contained evidence that people or their relatives had been involved in the assessments of people's needs and the development of plans for how those needs would be met. The service had used information about people's hobbies and interests to identify and offer suitable activities for people that encouraged them to maintain as much independence as possible at the home and in the community.

People who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them because information in care plans had been presented in ways that were easy to understand. People had expressed their views about their care at reviews of their care plans and had therefore been involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.

We observed that people had a good rapport with staff. Staff spoke politely to people, always referring to them by their preferred name. People had access to well furnished and equipped communal areas. People's rooms were personalised and reflected their hobbies and interests.