You are here

Avocet Trust Domiciliary Care Service Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8, 16 January 2014
Date of Publication: 11 February 2014
Inspection Report published 11 February 2014 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 8 January 2014 and 16 January 2014, 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 commissioners of services.

Our judgement

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

We found people were involved as much as possible in decisions about care and treatment. People were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement.

We looked at two people's assessments and care plans. We found people’s choices and preferences were reflected in the care plans. The plans were written in a way which promoted the person’s independence and reflected their diverse needs.

The care files contained instructions from health professionals and discussions held with GPs and family regarding care. These showed us that people were involved in decisions about their care and treatment as much as possible. However, the provider may find it useful to note plans were not always signed by the person concerned and/or their representative where possible to acknowledge their agreement in the planned care.

People we spoke with told us that staff were kind and helped them make decisions. Comments included, “I like the staff, they talk nicely to me. They help me with my meals and activities and things.” One person’s relative told us, “He is very sociable and likes to be busy. The staff involve him in all the decisions about his care to the best of his ability.”

We spoke to two members of the care staff, they described how they maintained people's dignity, privacy, independence and how they offered choices to people on a daily basis. They described the increase in frequency and variety of activities one person had accessed in recent months and how they were continuing to support the person with this programme. Activities such as trips to the cinema had been positive and outings to visit Beverly were being planned.

Records and staff discussions showed people had support from advocacy services when necessary. One person had recently accessed this support. One care worker confirmed how the advocacy services had found the person’s needs were being met and they were making positive progress.