You are here

Sue Ryder - Leckhampton Court Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 9, 15 January 2014
Date of Publication: 11 February 2014
Inspection Report published 11 February 2014 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 9 January 2014 and 15 January 2014, 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. People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. People felt valued as an individual and respected by all members of the staff team.

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. We spoke with six people who used the Day Hospice or Hospice (inpatient) services. They told us about the service they were using and why they had needed this. For example, two people had been admitted for control of their symptoms and as this had been achieved, were due to be discharged home. One person told us they had seen an information leaflet about the Day Hospice at their GPs surgery and had previous experience of the service. They said they had “a good interview” with a staff member and an opportunity to look around the hospice facilities before their treatment programme started. We were also shown a new information leaflet for people using the hospice service which had gone to print.

People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People told us they had been asked what they needed and wanted from the service and had been involved in planning their discharge. One person said, “You are respected as an individual over and above what is wrong with you”. The provider may find it useful to note that the three people we asked had not seen their care plans and did not always have information leaflets that were relevant to their care needs. For example, one person asked if they could have a copy of the provider’s ‘Working together to prevent pressure ulcers’ leaflet that we showed them. They also told us about some aspects of their needs which they had not shared with staff. A senior member of staff told us about changes that were underway which would help to ensure that care plans were completed with the person and were accessible to them.

People who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. One person said; “They have explained everything… The consultant said this is what we can do and what we can offer”. Another person said; “It was two way, she (doctor) wanted to make sure that everything I wanted to know about was covered.” They told us that they had discussed management of their medication on ‘several occasions’ to make sure the right balance was achieved for them.

People's diversity, values and human rights were respected. All of the people we spoke with were positive about the way the service was provided to them. One person said, “I feel totally respected and in control… you ring (call bell) with utter confidence that whatever you ask for will be carried out with no ado whatsoever”. Another person told us how the reception staff respected their preference not to have unannounced visitors and always checked with them first. This had made a big difference to them. Chaplaincy services had been introduced since our last inspection and one person we spoke with told us they had been glad to have the opportunity to receive communion and to talk with the chaplain.