Grove Hill Care Home

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

In this key question we looked at one quality statement. Processes for assessing people’s capacity to make decisions and for making decisions on their behalf were not in line with national guidelines. We identified a breach of the legal regulation in relation to consent to care and treatment. However, staff did ask for verbal consent before supporting people.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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 told us staff asked for their consent before supporting them. However, we observed that although staff asked for people’s consent, they at times woke people up to do so. We observed another staff telling a person: “You have to, it’s dinner time.”

The manager explained how they applied the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) within their role. They told us: “We make sure everyone has the right to make decisions even if they are unwise, we ensure people have mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place, applying for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) where necessary, we ensure we support people in the least restrictive way.” Staff told us they had received training in the MCA and DoLS.

Processes to assess whether people had capacity to make specific decisions and to make best interest decisions on their behalf were not always in line with legislation and national guidelines. For example, some people had mental capacity assessments in place which were not related to a specific decision, and these assessments did not always show evidence of how the person was supported to understand the decision that needed to be made. Relatives were not always involved in best interest decisions where people lacked capacity to make their own decision. This meant there was a risk that decisions were being made for people which may have been against their wishes.