You are here

Archived: Brimley Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 3 January 2013
Date of Publication: 27 February 2013
Inspection Report published 27 February 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 3 January 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 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

We found that people's privacy was protected. For example, people told us that their bedrooms were their own and were private. Staff told us that some people liked to be left alone to bathe and that they were supported to do this. Staff said that one person using this service preferred to have a same sex carer, and this was respected.

During out observations we saw examples of staff being respectful and treating people with dignity. For example staff waited for each person to finish their sentence before they spoke, and they included them in conversations and activities. Staff talked to us about professional boundaries. For example, they said that staff were friendly with people, and would recognise if friendliness became teasing. Staff said they were comfortable with challenging one another to ensure they always acted appropriately.

Staff supported people to make choices and decisions about their daily lives. For example people told us they chose what they did with their days, what time they went to bed, what time they got up and what they wore. People said they chose what to eat, but if they changed their minds they could have something else. One person told us they liked music. Our observations and conversations with staff showed that this person was supported to purchase and to listen to music whenever they wished. Another person said they liked a cup of tea in bed when they woke up, and that staff bought this to them.

Staff had received training in the mental capacity act and demonstrated a good understanding of the principles underpinning this act. Some people had signed consent forms, for example giving consent to staff to share information about them, although staff thought that some people's capacity to consent to this was in doubt. Staff showed us the policy which stated that staff should carry out an assessment of capacity in these situations. The provider may find it useful to note that this type of assessment was not being carried out.

We saw that staff supported people to maintain their independence and to develop their skills. For example staff had provided equipment and support to help one person to attend to their personal hygiene needs and to remain continent. Another person had been supported to develop skills to travel independently. There were plans to support this person to develop skills to manage their own money.