You are here

Archived: Nelson Mandela House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 7 August 2014
Date of Publication: 4 September 2014
Inspection Report published 04 September 2014 PDF | 84.17 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 7 August 2014, 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.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service were supported to understand the care and treatment choices available to them. Staff told us they gave people choices daily. This was confirmed by people we spoke with. Examples of these choices included, food, activities and what they would like to wear. Whilst reviewing records we saw that people’s likes, dislikes and preferences had been recorded. For example, one person liked to use their own beaker for drinks. Another person enjoyed playing cards and reading. Where people needed support to make decisions, relatives and professionals were involved. This meant that people were supported to make decisions about their care.

Most care records we looked at had been signed by the person or their relative. These demonstrated their agreement to the care plan. The registered manager told us that where people had not signed their care plan it was because they were not physically able to. The registered manager agreed to record that the person had consented verbally where this was the case. Care records identified if people were able to make their own decisions. The registered manager told us that the service did have mental capacity assessment forms and best interest forms. However, the records we looked at did not contain any capacity assessments. The registered manager told us this was because the people were able to make their own decisions. This meant that the provider had developed systems to protect people who did not have capacity to make decisions about their care and support.

We observed staff communicate with people in a manner they could understand. Staff communicated in a calm, respectful and polite manner. Care records provided information for staff in how to communicate with people. For example we saw instruction for staff to stand in front of the person when talking to them so the person could lip read. People and relatives we spoke with told us they were involved in decisions about their care. This meant that people's views were gained and their individual preferences were respected.

The registered manager told us that people had been made aware of the complaints process. People we spoke with told us they would speak to the registered manager if they had a complaint. One person said, “I am happy the way I am, I have no complaints.”