You are here

Archived: Michael House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 February 2013
Date of Publication: 27 February 2013
Inspection Report published 27 February 2013 PDF

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 5 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We 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

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. During the visit we looked at the care records for four people. Each care record contained signed consent forms. This included consent to share information. One person had indicated that they were happy for staff to share health information with specified members of their family. They had also recorded that this consent was only for certain aspects of their health. For those people who were unable to sign, their agreement was recorded and signed by their personal assistant. This indicated that people understood the care the service was providing and were happy to receive it. We observed the way staff were providing support to people who use the service. Staff communicated clearly with people before providing any support.

Staff we spoke with were aware that people could withdraw their consent at any time and that they needed to check people’s consent on an on-going basis. They told us that they always asked for people’s consent to ensure they were providing care and support only if the person needed or wanted it. One of the personal assistants told us: “I check people’s care plans and people are able to tell us if they want or don’t want something.” Another said: “I would always gain a person’s consent to call their doctor.” People using the service told us staff checked with them whether they were happy to receive care. During our visit we spoke with four people who all confirmed that staff respected their wishes and that they could refuse care if they wanted to. One person said: “Staff do just what I want and will stop if I tell them to.”

We spoke with eight staff, who demonstrated a good understanding of their responsibilities for obtaining valid consent. They were clear about the action required if any person was assessed as not having capacity to consent. We looked at training records which showed that the majority of staff had attended training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 within the last 12 months. This meant that the provider ensured staff were aware of how to act in accordance with legal requirements when gaining consent.