The Mount Camphill Community

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

People’s care and support needs were assessed fully before moving into the service and were subject to ongoing reviews. People were at the centre of this process and were supported by their relatives, other professionals if required and staff from the service. Annual reviews took place but reviews were also held following incidents, accidents, periods of ill health or any changes in people’s presentation and behaviour. People were encouraged to make independent choices about all aspects of their day to day lives. Staff understood consent and the need to get agreement from people before taking any action or involving them in tasks or activities. Decisions made in people’s best interests were subject to meetings and were accurately documented. Appropriate mental capacity assessments were in place where required to support people needing help with some decision making.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Processes were in place for assessing people’s needs. Pre-assessment paperwork was used to inform care plans to determine the level of support required in each area of a person’s day to day life, following the routines that suited them to achieve the best outcomes. Managers carried out regular reviews of people’s care plans and risk assessments to make sure they were up to date and fit for purpose. People were at the centre of these assessments and input was sought from relatives, care staff and other professionals.

The registered manager described a robust pre-assessment procedure for people wanting to move into the service. Some people were referred to the service from other homes or by local authorities and others by family members. In every case a full assessment of people’s support needs were carried out off site, followed by visits to the service first for a few hours and then later for an overnight stay. There were several opportunities for the person and their loved ones to assess for themselves whether moving to the home would suit their needs.

Relatives explained to us their experience of their loved ones being assessed and the processes that were followed prior to people moving in to the service. All aspects of people’s care and support needs were assessed and documented at an initial meeting involving the person, their relatives, managers from the service and other professionals if needed. A relative said, “They (people) are at the centre of decision making and they contribute to decisions about their care and support.” Another relative commented about the ongoing and annual assessment process: “Preparation for annual review meetings is always good as is the expertise evidenced during those meetings with the local authority.” Another relative told us about their loved one who had developed a physical discomfort. It was very unusual for the person to complain about being in any pain and when the relatives raised this with staff they immediately sought appropriate medical assistance and kept the family updated with any changes.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People were involved in all aspects of their care planning and reviews. A staff member said, “We involve people. We sit down and do risk assessments with them.” Mental capacity assessments and decisions relating to deprivation of people’s liberty (DoLS) were all appropriately recorded and regularly reviewed.

Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people. Staff had completed training in mental capacity and knew how to support people who needed support with making some decisions. Comments from staff included, “Important to listen, give choices, say ‘can do now, or in five minutes’” and “Talk all of the time, never force them.”

People were given choices in all aspects of their day to day life. We observed staff supporting people and providing options for example, with activities, food and where they wanted to go or to be with. Staff asked, “Is it ok to do this now’ ‘are you happy to (have dinner / go to class.)” People were able to make decisions for themselves and staff respected this while at the same time keeping people safe. Some people lacked capacity to make some decisions for example, to consent to constant supervision and consent to live at the service. In each case a decision specific mental capacity assessment was in place which were regularly reviewed. Similarly, deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) were in place for some people. Decisions were made in people best interests following meetings involving the person themselves, their relatives and professionals. A relative said, “She may have trouble understanding certain aspects of her care, but is supported well in this.”