You are here

Archived: SLC Signposts

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 October 2012
Date of Publication: 17 April 2013
Inspection Report published 17 April 2013 PDF | 78.66 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 looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 8 October 2012, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider was meeting this standard.

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

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

People were supported to develop their independence and community involvement. We spoke to the manager who demonstrated how staff have assisted people to take part in activities in the community, such as volunteering in a charity shop and taking part in local projects. People who used the service were involved in decisions about their care and treatment and people, and their representatives, had opportunities to give feedback on the service. The provider held regular ‘tenants meetings’ to seek people’s views and discuss any issues or concerns about their care. We saw evidence of well completed care plans. We saw evidence of review meetings with individuals, which were clearly written up to capture individual wishes and interests.

We also saw evidence that the provider held quarterly events to involve people who used the service in the delivery of their care. We also saw examples of newsletters produced to keep people up to date with information about the service. People who used the service and their relatives told us that they felt able to raise any concerns with the staff at SLC Signposts. Complaints information was produced in an easy read format. A relative we spoke with was very positive about the staff at SLC Signpost, and told us that they had no concerns about the support their relative received. They said that the team was "respectful and very dedicated".

Discussions with staff showed that they had a clear understanding of the need to respect and value the people they supported. People’s care plans contained information about their individual preferences such as food choices and activities. A relative we spoke with said that they had been fully involved in their relatives care plan and that it was reviewed on a regular basis.