The Minster

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

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. We identified areas where improvements to records were required to ensure capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place, and where they were in place they were kept under regular review to demonstrate they remained the least restrictive option. People needs were assessed, and they were supported to access health appointments when needed. People were empowered to make their own decisions about their care and support.

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.

People and relatives told us their needs were assessed, and they were supported to access health appointments when needed. One relative told us, “We’re very grateful and thankful, the staff have always been loving and caring towards her and her physical needs are being met."

Staff told us people were involved in assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs.

Processes were in place to ensure people had up-to-date care and support assessments including medical, psychological, functional and skills. The service involved other professionals within this including GP’s, speech and language therapists and physiotherapists. People had lived at the service for many years. The registered manager told us about the assessment process they would use for any new people moving into the service.

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 empowered to make their own decisions about their care and support. We observed staff seeking consent before supporting individuals. Relatives confirmed they had been involved in best interest decisions in relation to their loved ones support. One relative told us a speech and language therapist had recently made contact with them for a meeting to discuss a best interest decision.

Staff spoken with understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Comments included, “Residents can make their own decisions, if it’s an unwise decision, their choice” and “Never assume someone doesn’t have capacity, best interest, allow people to make decisions we deem unwise.”

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 MCA 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 can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests (BI) and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Improvements were needed to ensure capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place were kept under regular review. This was to demonstrate they remained the least restrictive option, and appropriate capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place where needed. The registered manager started to address this during the assessment. Where restrictions were in place, capacity assessments and best interest decisions had not always been completed to evidence that the restrictions were the least restrictive option. For example, at times some people had restricted access to the kitchen. This was because the kitchen door was locked at specific times throughout the day and people had to request staff support to access the kitchen. We discussed this with the registered manager who confirmed this was due to safety issues. During the assessment, the registered manager reviewed this and confirmed risk assessments were now in place which reduced the level of restriction. Where needed, appropriate applications were completed to authorise a person being deprived of their liberty.