You are here

Archived: Rubery Court

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 9 April 2013
Date of Publication: 8 May 2013
Inspection Report published 8 May 2013 PDF | 86.65 KB

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

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 April 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with staff and talked with other regulators or the Department of Health.

Our judgement

People who used the service where they were able gave consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they received.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked to see if people who used the service at Rubery Court gave consent to the care, treatment and support they received. We found that where possible people that used the service did give consent to their care treatment and support.

We saw that one person with complex needs who used the service had a capacity assessment which had been completed by the local authority. We saw that following the capacity assessment a best interest meeting had been held to discuss this person’s care, treatment and support. This meant that people who knew and understood the person were involved in decision making when the person was unable to give consent.

At our previous inspection we saw that one person had a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) assessment completed. Staff in care homes and hospitals should always try to care for a person in a way that does not deprive them of their liberty. If they are unable to do this, the registered manager of a care home is responsible for applying for an authorisation for the deprivation of liberty. At this inspection we were informed that the DOLS process had now finished. This meant the service had used the appropriate policies and procedures to support the person when they did not consent to their care, treatment and support.

We saw that some of the people who used the service had an advocate. An advocate supports people to make decisions when they are unable to do so due to their mental capacity. One person who used the service had involvement from an independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA). This meant the service was using the appropriate external agencies to support people in issues of consent to care.

One person who used the service showed us their person centred plan. We could see in the plan that there had been a meeting which involved the person who used the service and other people who supported them. We saw that this person had a consent form which showed that the person had consented to a named care task. This meant that where they were able, people who used the service consented to their care, treatment and support.