You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18, 23 May 2011
Date of Publication: 21 June 2011
Inspection Report published 21 June 2011 PDF | 131.14 KB

Contents menu

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 reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 18/05/2011, 23/05/2011, checked the provider's records, observed how people were being cared for, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

Our judgement is that the service is compliant with this outcome as people who use the service are able to make decisions and choices about the care and support they need and are involved in decisions about how their home is run.

User experience

One person told us she was able to make decisions about her care and about how she spent her day and was given staff support as needed.

Staff told us that the routines were flexible and that people were able to make choices and decisions about how they spent their day.

Other evidence

The service sent us a copy of their Provider Compliance Assessment (PCA) as part of the planned review; this helped us to understand what was in place to ensure the service was compliant.

We were told that people who use services were “encouraged to make as many independent decisions as possible”.

During a visit to the service we observed staff treating people in a friendly and respectful manner. Records showed that some staff had attended training to help them to understand how to treat people as individuals and with dignity and respect.

Throughout the visit we saw that routines were flexible and that people were encouraged to be independent; records supported that people were able to decide how to spend their day and were supported by staff when needed.

The area manager told us that people were given clear and useful information about the services available at Pendle View which could be made available in other suitable formats.

We were told that before moving into the home each person would be involved in an assessment of their needs to make sure they could be supported in the right way. We saw a new ‘resident’ being shown around the home, introduced to staff and the other people who lived there; they were able to choose a suitable bedroom and ask questions about the home.

Each person had a plan of care which was based on their needs, choices and preferences; the records were kept up to date and showed that people were involved in decisions about their care.

We were told that it was not always appropriate to hold group ‘resident’ meetings but people were encouraged to express their views and opinions of the service through regular reviews and through informal discussions with staff and management.

Visitors to the home were able to give their views and opinions of the service by completing questionnaires; the information would be used to improve the service.