You are here

Archived: Neighbourhood Care HQ

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 November 2012
Date of Publication: 22 November 2012
Inspection Report published 22 November 2012 PDF | 48.58 KB

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 reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 14/11/2012, checked the provider's records, observed how people were being cared for, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff and talked to people who use services.

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.

The provider was meeting this standard.

User experience

We visited three people in their own homes. We asked them to tell us how involved they had been in making decisions about how their support was provided. Everybody confirmed that they had met the agency’s manager before they started to receive support. One person said, “We met and discussed what care and support was needed, that is the care and support I receive, I have my folder with plans in and they are all agreed with me”.

We asked people if they felt staff respected their privacy and dignity, one person told us, “I am always treated with respect, they are so nice and really care”.

We observed that care workers upheld people’s privacy and dignity when their personal needs with bathing, showering, and toileting were being attended to.

Other evidence

Was privacy and dignity respected?

We read the care records for three people. We saw that personal preferences were recorded. We observed the manager helped people in a dignified way. They respected their privacy and gave them time to proceed at their own pace. The manager demonstrated to us that they had a very clear understanding of the care and support needs of the people they visited. They knew what people’s preferences for care were and endeavoured to respect this as far as was possible.

Were people involved in making choices and decisions about their care?

The care plans read included a pre assessment of people’s needs. This was carried out before care and support was provided. These records contained information about the person's preferred name and identified the person's usual routine. All three care plans had been developed with the person who then signed them to agree. We read in one care plan times of visits were flexible and based on the shift patterns of a relative. This meant the person could chose to continue to have care provided by their relative as well as a care worker.