Royal Mencap Society - Drummond Court Also known as Drummond Court

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, support, physical health, and communication needs were assessed and planned for. However, further work was needed to ensure people’s plans contained information about their strengths, goals and aspirations and the nature and level of support they needed to achieve their short and long-term goals. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and if needed, the right legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty.

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.

A relative told us that staff were able to communicate effectively with their family member and how this had improved their quality of life because being understood reduced their frustration and anger.

Staff knew people’s individual communication skills, abilities and preferred methods and they were able to communicate effectively by interpreting gestures, vocal sounds and body language.

People’s support plans showed the person’s health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs were considered and planned for. However, detail was lacking on people’s strengths, goals and aspirations and the nature and level of support they needed to achieve their goals. Whilst support plans were reviewed, they did not show that people’s needs were regularly re-assessed, and support plans revised accordingly to accurately reflect current needs.

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’s capacity and ability to consent was always taken into account. People were supported to understand their right to consent and were empowered to make their own decisions when involved in planning how their care and support was provided. People and/or their representatives were involved in planning their care and support. Relatives felt individual needs were understood and that their family member was treated as an individual.

Management and staff had a good working knowledge of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLs). Staff understood the importance of ensuring people understood what they were consenting to and obtaining people’s consent before they delivered care. They empowered people to make their own decisions about how their day-to-day care and support was provided. They understood people’s ability to make decisions through verbal or non-verbal means.

Systems were in place to take account of people’s capacity and their ability to consent. Where people could not make decisions and consent to their care, the correct processes were followed to make sure any decisions were made in their best interests. The principles of MCA had been met and applications for DoLs had been completed and authorised where needed. Some capacity assessments were decision specific with best interest decisions to support them. For example, two people both had capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place in relation to lap belts being used on their wheelchairs.