You are here

Archived: Ablewell Care

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 19 June 2012
Date of Publication: 6 July 2012
Inspection Report published 6 July 2012 PDF | 45.67 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 19/06/2012, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

The provider was meeting this standard.

People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. They were supported in promoting their independence.

User experience

During our visit to the service we spoke with four people provided with care and support by the service and two of their relatives. All said that they were looked after well, treated with dignity and respect and they were asked their views on how they would like to be cared for and supported. For example, one person said; “They treat me how I would like to be treated”. Another said; “They ask me how I like things to be done. For example, they always ask how I would like my bed made. It’s nice to have it made how I like it”. One relative said their family member; “Is treated properly and with respect”.

Other evidence

We saw that all the people we visited had folders which included their care plans and information about the service, relevant policies and contact numbers. All the four plans were also person centred and had evidence to show how the views of the person using the service or their relative had been taken into account in planning what they wanted. For example, all plans included support plans including details about individual’s preferences, activities they liked to do and their backgrounds.

Plans were also focused on supporting people to live at home. Risk assessments were in place to ensure this could be achieved as safely as possible for all four people. However we did see that one person who needed assistance with moving did not have a moving and handling risk assessment. We brought this to the attention of the registered manager for the service. She said she would address this straight away.

We also spoke with four members of staff employed by the service. They were all clear on the aims of the service and their roles in helping people maintain their independence and so be enabled to stay in their own homes.