You are here

Archived: Total Community Care

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 June 2012
Date of Publication: 16 July 2012
Inspection Report published 16 July 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

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independencehad been respected, and people’s views and experiences had been taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

User experience

We reviewed a recent survey of people who had used the service. Eight out of 35 people had completed the survey. All of them had responded positively to questions about their experience. One person commented, `Staff respect my wishes and opinions.'

One relative told us that they had been involved in decisions about the care package that was in place for his son. Another relative told us that they were, "Very much involved and we feel part of the team."

Other evidence

We looked at four care plans of people who used the service. Care plans were person centred. It was evident that people and their representatives had been involved in the development and subsequent reviews of care plans. We saw evidence that senior staff had made regular visits to people to discuss aspects of their care needs and that this meant that people who used the service had remained involved in decisions about their care.

People who used the service had access to their care plans which included comprehensive details about how carers would support them. Care plans included information for carers about how they respect people's privacy and dignity. The service had promoted dignity in care to it's staff through training, supervision and newsletters.

We found that people who use the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them; had expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment; and had been supported in promoting their independence and community involvement.