You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 17 July 2014
Date of Publication: 19 August 2014
Inspection Report published 19 August 2014 PDF | 80.25 KB

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 17 July 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at three care plan files.

Each care plan had a photograph of the person they were about. They and/or their family members had been involved in the care planning process and clearly had an on-going contribution to it. We were told that there would be several meetings with the individual, their family and any other carers to get a background, prior to admission. We saw that reports from previous placements prior to a person coming to Nelson’s Croft were also used to inform the staff about their care needs. Then all involved would contribute to designing a package of support for the person. The care plan included a pen picture and comprehensive support plans. There was information about people's care and medical needs, their interests and choices. Recorded were family and friend contacts, information about any specialist input they needed and various risk assessments. People's preferences including religious needs were recorded and there was a communication plan.

We saw that there were many activities offered, such as disco nights, pamper nights and themed days such as African days and Polish days, where the dress, cultures and food of those nations would be sampled. Photos were viewed by us of previous events such as going to a well-known fast food restaurant, or to the beach or having a haircut.

Most of the information in the care plan written by the staff and the person or their relatives, was in the first person and was very personal and person centred. Care plans were reviewed every year routinely and more frequently if circumstances changed. Staff continuously checked the care plans to ensure they remained up to date and effective. We saw that there was a planning tool which key workers used to diary things such as health checks, appointments and reviews. This meant that the provider and staff were aware of any changes in people's needs and care. We noted that they then reviewed the care plan and the persons care. We saw that if there had been an incident or event which had caused the review, action had then been taken to adjust the care plan. This showed that the provider and staff had learned from these in order that such risks would be minimised or avoided, in the future. This meant that the provider promoted peoples' well-being by taking account of all their needs. There was effective communication between all the people involved in a person's care.

The provider had identified risks and had said how they would be managed and reviewed. We noted that risk assessments had been reviewed in April 2014. Some of the things assessed included using vehicles and public transport, going out and about and showering and bathing. There was a general evacuation plan and individual personal evacuation plans for people living at Nelson’s Croft. This meant that there were arrangements in place to

deal with foreseeable emergencies.

Each person's plan contained their morning, evening and weekend routines. They also contained financial information and agreements, called 'My money and benefits'. All the staff we spoke with demonstrated a thorough knowledge of people's needs and knew where to access further information. Staff members were able to access the 'Autism Practice Department' in head office where they could get specialist advice. Staff had been trained to meet the needs of the people they supported. One of the staff told us that all new staff get specialist training packages including ways to communicate, to enable them to work with the people receiving the service. This meant that the staff were sensitive to the people using the service and had been able to reflect this within the care plan and the provision of care.

People who used services were only deprived of their liberty when this had been authorised by the Court of Protection, or by a Supervisory Body under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We saw that staff had been appropriately trained in the policy and procedures.