You are here

Two Cedars Residential Care Home Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 28 February 2013
Date of Publication: 1 May 2013
Inspection Report published 1 May 2013 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 28 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

During our inspection we asked people if they felt respected by staff and from the six people that were asked they said they did. We saw evidence of two staff talking to five people in a respectful manner. We observed and listened to how staff interacted with people during the day. We saw that people were involved in conversations; people were relaxed and at ease with staff. We saw that staff listened to what people were saying and responded appropriately and respectfully.

People’s diversity, values and human rights were respected. From the two staff that we spoke to they gave us examples of how they showed respect to people. One staff member said they gave people time to respond for themselves, listened carefully and gave reassurance. We watched the same staff member offering a person support with their meal. We observed a gentle, yet encouraging approach which was respectful and dignified. .

People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People’s views were gathered both formally and informally. The home held meetings each Sunday which gave people an opportunity to raise issues about how the home was run, and what activities were going on locally. People’s views were also expressed in their care plans; we viewed six care plans as well as a respite care plan, all of which had each been recently updated. We spoke with three people about their care and treatment and each person expressed that they felt involved in the development of their care plan, and that it reflected their needs and views accurately. In addition to talking with people about their plans we saw that each plan had signed a consent form advising that they had been involved in the development of their care plan. These were signed either by the person living in the home or their carer respectively.

People were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. We spoke with six people who informed us about community activities they had been involved in. One person said that in the summer the home was “vibrant” and there were trips out into the local area. One person told us that they had been to Swanage and also to a pantomime. Two people told us that if they wished to go into the local town they would be supported by staff to do so. We asked the staff about how people living in the home could find out about community activities and they showed us pin boards with various activities advertised. We also observed another pin board downstairs which had a monthly planner in place displaying activities which were on each day at the home. It also detailed days in which the local library, podiatrist, and Champlain services were visiting the home.