The Poets

People received safe person-centred care. Safeguarding procedures protected people from abuse. Medicines were managed and administered safely. There were enough skilled staff to ensure people’s safety and meet their needs. People were involved in decisions about their safety and wellbeing. Risk management processes supported people’s safety, independence and wishes.

People were involved in planning their care. Care and treatment plans’ reflected people’s preferences and promoted effective outcomes. People’s needs were regularly assessed and reviewed. People had access to health and social care professionals and medical treatment. Effective processes monitored people’s health and outcomes. People’s rights were respected, and care and treatment provided in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People did not always receive a timely response when using their call bell. People were respected as individuals and were treated with kindness, compassion, and dignity. People were supported to maintain friendships and receive visitors. Staff felt valued by their leaders and colleagues.

People were enabled to influence the way their support was provided. Information was provided in a way that met people’s communication needs. People had opportunities to feedback on their care and influence change. People’s protected characteristics and diversity needs were considered in line with the Equality Act 2010. The Act ensures everyone is lawfully protected from discrimination.

The service was well-led. The culture of the service supported people to have choice and control over their lives. Systems were in place to assess and check outcomes for people. Records were correct and contemporaneous. Feedback was used to inform change and learning. There was partnership working with key organisations.