You are here

Archived: Aspirations Residential Southwest Also known as The Limes

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 30 July 2013
Date of Publication: 29 August 2013
Inspection Report published 29 August 2013 PDF | 75.41 KB

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

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 30 July 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, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

Reasons for our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Most people living in the home did not have the ability to verbally communicate their consent to receive care. We looked at the care records for three people and saw that these detailed how people communicated their wishes. This included a ‘communications dictionary’ that described what different expressions and gestures that people used were communicating. Staff understood how to communicate with each individual and used this knowledge to help people to be involved in making day-to-day decisions about their care and daily living. We observed staff talking to people about how they wanted to spend their time and what they would like to eat and drink.

Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. Care plans detailed the type of decisions that people would not have the capacity to make and would have to be made in their best interest. We saw that where significant decisions needed to be made for people best interest meetings had taken place, involving other professionals as well as family members and advocates. If people did not have the capacity to be involved in writing and agreeing to their care plans these had been written with the knowledge of staff and relatives. The provider may find it useful to note that there was no record to say that these care plans had been written in people’s best interest.

There was evidence that the home assessed if any restrictions were in place that might impact on an individual’s liberty. At the time of our visit the home had not made any applications to deprive any individual of their liberty.