You are here

Archived: Netherfield House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 December 2013
Date of Publication: 4 January 2014
Inspection Report published 04 January 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 11 December 2013 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

We were unable to speak to people using the personal care service offered by Netherfield House because when we visited on 11 December 2013 as no-one was using this service. Netherfield House are registered to provide personal care to people and aim to provide personal care in the future. At the time of our visit they were offering more general support services such as assistance with transport and helping people to access their local community. We spoke with staff and looked at records to see how well the service had prepared for when it is offering personal care.

We spoke with staff and looked at records to see how well the service had prepared for when it is offering personal care. We found staff were clear on how people's independence could be promoted and they were to provide support to people.

We saw that people were involved with planning their support needs. We saw that people were involved when reviewing their progress against their personal objectives or support needs. We saw that people recorded their thoughts during reviews and had opportunities to discuss these with members of staff.

We noted people's consent was sought through their support plan and service agreement in relation to the care provided to them.

We saw meetings for people using the service were held on a regular basis. There were minutes available for the meetings held and we could see people's ideas or feedback were listened to. This meant that people were involved in the planning and delivery of the service.