You are here

Archived: Grimsargh House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 February 2013
Date of Publication: 26 March 2013
Inspection Report published 26 March 2013 PDF | 82.83 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 8 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

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

We spoke with four people using the service and one relative. We inspected five care plans, spoke with care staff and reviewed the provider policies and procedures. We observed activities during our visit including lunch time and the giving of medication.

People told us that staff took the time to learn their choices and preferences. They said staff gave them choices and helped them with their choices when needed. People told us that staff encouraged them to use their skills and one person on a short term stay said that they were very pleased with how staff had helped their recovery to move back home.

The relative we spoke with was happy with the home and the staff and found it welcoming. They felt that people in the home were treated with dignity and respect.

The care plans were all clear and comprehensive. They showed understanding of the person's strengths and preferences as well as their needs. They showed appropriate reviews of capacity and consent and appropriate recording of lasting powers of attorney. They were based on the initial pre-admission assessment but showed evidence of regular review and updating when appropriate.

Our observations showed that people were encouraged to express choices and were appropriately supported in making choices. We saw that such activities were carried out in ways which were respectful to the individual.

Care and management staff showed a good understanding of the requirements regarding consent and capacity in this type of service. They had regular training updates. If care staff had any concerns about a person’s changing capacity they sought help appropriately from the manager. The manager involved other professionals and services when appropriate. We inspected the provider’s policies and staff records and these were appropriate to supporting choice and understanding capacity and consent requirements in this type of service.