You are here

Autism Together - 86 Allport Road Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 October 2013
Date of Publication: 6 November 2013
Inspection Report published 06 November 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 10 October 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and talked with commissioners of services.

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

We spoke with three members of staff and the manager who told us they had received training about the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and during discussion they displayed a good understanding of the issues of capacity and consent. We found that this subject was covered at induction and staff also received refresher training.

We saw that the home had communication boards throughout the home with pictures displayed which people were encouraged to use in order to communicate their needs. The manager confirmed that staff had received training on a variety of communication methods. We saw that care files incorporated a 'decision making and limits document' which meant the home had considered what people could consent to and what issues required best interest meetings.

The manager told us that independent advocates were used when necessary and that best interests meetings were held when any major decisions about the person’s life had to be made but this had not been necessary for a while. The provider may find it useful to note that there was no information available for people who lived at the home about accessing independent advocates which may in some circumstances be helpful to them.

We spoke with two relatives who told us they were kept informed of any changes to care plans. They also told us they attended annual care plan reviews.