You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 22 October 2012
Date of Publication: 16 November 2012
Inspection Report published 16 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

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. The provider was meeting this standard

User experience

Most of the people who use the service were unable to communicate their views verbally. The people who could, told us that they liked living at the home and had lots of activities. One person told us “the animal lady is coming today, she comes here a lot and lets me hold the animals” another person told us “Next week we are having a Halloween party, its fancy dress, we have lots of parties”. A relative told us “most of the people who live here don’t understand their care and treatment, but I am always consulted on my relative’s behalf and kept fully informed of any necessary treatment they need. In addition I am often asked what activities I think they would like to do. People here are not always able to access the community this time of year because of the weather so the manager tries to bring the community here. There is always something going on”.

Other evidence

Peoples’ diversity, values and human rights were respected. We used our SOFI (Short Observational Framework for Inspection) tool. The SOFI tool allowed us to spend time watching how staff and people who use the service interacted and helped us record how people spent their time and whether they had positive experiences. This included looking at the support that was given to them by the staff. We saw staff communicating with people in a way that they would understand and which gave them the opportunity to make choices about what they wanted.

The manager told us that regular meetings with residents relatives and staff are held to enable a variety of activities to be planned that the people who use the service would enjoy or had asked for. In addition, people who use the service regularly interact with people from other homes within the organisation and members of the community. Whilst we were visiting, the people who use the service were interacting in a therapeutic session where they were able to touch and stroke a variety of animals. We observed that staff were encouraging positive interactions and engaged with people in a positive, supportive, manner whilst they encouraged people to express themselves. Staff were professional and person focused through out our observations. One person did not want to join in the session and this was respected. We observed staff supporting this person to engage in an alternative activity.

We looked at four person centred support plans, which had been developed with the people who use the service or their representatives. The plans documented their wishes and preferences in relation to how their care was provided, how they liked to spend their time and how they preferred to be supported. We saw that people’s care plans highlighted their likes and dislikes and that people were engaging in activities that matched the choices highlighted in their care plans. This meant that the service was focused on meeting people’s individual needs, respected their preferences and included people’s views and experiences on how the service was delivered.