You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 23 January 2012
Date of Publication: 28 February 2012
Inspection Report published 28 February 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 are involved in making decisions about their care and are provided with information about the service.

User experience

The agency supported people who were living in apartments adjacent to the care home, Grove House, which are both owned by the same provider. Care is offered as extra support if people wanted it. Some of the apartments had communal areas as well as peoples own living areas. The agency also supported some people who lived in the local community in their own homes.

One relative told us that the agency always spoke with them if the staff had any concerns during their visits.

One person told us that they were able to contact staff through a call system at any time and that staff had visited them when they had requested it.

The three people who used the service and one relative we spoke with told us the service was a reliable one and that no calls had ever been missed.

One person told us that staff always knocked on their door before entering but often entered without waiting to be invited in.

Other evidence

The manager told us that they always assessed the needs of people before providing a service. A service user pack was available to inform people about the service and the manager advised us that people had been given a copy of this. This described the rights people had and listed how staff would protect the dignity and privacy of staff. Details on charges and notice periods were also stated.

One care plan we looked at recorded that a person had declined monitoring of their weight by staff, their decision was respected. Where people had requested help with medications their agreement for staff to assist with this had been sought.

One care plan considered the ambience and atmosphere that staff should promote recording that the person preferred calm, peaceful and unrushed visits.

An extension of the care service provided was the option for people to be involved in some social events at the apartments such as coffee mornings.