You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 October 2012
Date of Publication: 19 October 2012
Inspection Report published 19 October 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

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 5 October 2012, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and talked with stakeholders.

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 had begun to involve people in their care.

Reasons for our judgement

When we inspected the service on 22 August 2012 we found that people were not always consulted about the way care and treatment was delivered and there was little involvement with the community.

When we inspected the service on 5 October 2012 we found that the provider had made progress towards supporting people to express their views and involving them in making decisions about their care and treatment. The provider had involved people who were assessed as having the capacity to make day to day decisions in their monthly care plan reviews for October 2012. For example we saw that a person's views about their current mobility had been recorded and their wishes about support with personal hygiene had been taken into account.

People who use the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. We spoke with two people when we inspected the home on 5 October 2012 and they told us they felt their wishes were taken in to account with regards to personal care and activities. The people told us they could ask the staff for support they needed and make choices on a daily basis. The staff we spoke with on the day of our inspection confirmed this, and gave examples of how they consulted people about the time they wanted to get up in the mornings or the type of personal care they wished to be provided.

Although family members had been consulted about some aspects of care involving consent for those people without capacity to consent themselves, the care plans for these people did not show that family members were routinely involved in planning and reviewing care for these people. The provider told us they would address this.

The provider told us that people had been given the opportunity to access the community via a transport service but had declined this. One person we spoke with confirmed that they did not wish to go out now the summer was over, although they enjoyed spending time in the garden.