beta

You're viewing our new website - find out more

Publication - Research Publication

National health and care standards: consultation analysis

Published: 28 Apr 2017
Part of:
Health and social care, Research
ISBN:
9781786529206

Full analysis of responses to the consultation on new national care standards.

116 page PDF

997.4kB

116 page PDF

997.4kB

Contents
National health and care standards: consultation analysis
8. Views on proposed Standard 5: And if the organisation also provides the premises I use.

116 page PDF

997.4kB

8. Views on proposed Standard 5: And if the organisation also provides the premises I use.

Background

The first four Standards are relevant to everyone. It is proposed that these are complemented by three additional Standards that apply only in specific circumstances. For example, if a young person is looked after by the local authority and living in a residential unit, then Standards 1 - 4 will be complemented by Standards 5 and 7. Or, if an adult is accommodated and receiving compulsory treatment under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, then Standards 5 and 6 apply as well as Standards 1 - 4.

Question 7: To what extent do you think this Standard describes what people should expect to experience from health, care and social work services?

8.1 376 (85%) respondents to the full consultation and 51 (86%) respondents to the easy-read consultation answered this question.

8.2 Table 7 in Annex 1 shows views by category of respondent to the full consultation. Table 8.1 below summarises these views.

Table 8.1: Views on the extent to which Standard 5 describes what people should expect to experience from health, care and social work services: full consultation

View No. of respondents % of all respondents
Strongly agree 143 38
Agree 161 43
Neither agree nor disagree 56 15
Disagree 16 4
Total respondents 376 100

8.3 81% of those who provided a view strongly agreed or agreed that Standard 5 describes what people should expect to experience from health, care and social work services. Individual respondents expressed stronger support than organisations with 49% of the former, compared with 28% of the latter, strongly agreeing with the statement. Relatively few (4%) respondents disagreed.

8.4 Views of those responding to the easy-read version of the consultation are summarised in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2: Views on the extent to which Standard 5 describes what people should expect to experience from health, care and social work services: easy-read consultation

View No. of respondents % of all respondents
Yes, agree with this standard 46 90
Mixed - some agree and some agree a bit (reflecting group views) 3 6
Agree a bit with this standard 1 2
No - disagree with this standard 1 2
Total respondents 51 100

8.5 All but one respondent who answered this question in the easy-read version of the consultation agreed a bit or agreed fully with Standard 5.

General views in favour of Standard 5

8.6 A few respondents expressed general views in support of Standard 5. The Standard was perceived to be thorough and comprehensive, whilst retaining clarity. The section on compassion was highlighted as particularly welcome, as was the descriptive statement 5.14 on access to the internet.

Broad concerns about Standard 5

8.7 Four main concerns were raised:

  • Standard 5 appears to be more aspirational than practical. A recurring view was that some well-run organisations may, through no fault of their own, be unable to meet all of the outcomes. A few respondents commented that the Standard set very good care homes up to fail. Concerns were raised that the Standard may raise expectations which cannot be met.
  • The outcome heading appears to be unfinished and unclear.
  • What is meant by "premises"? Questions were raised over whether settings such as foster care and school accommodation on the mainland for islanders boarding through the week, would be included under "premises".
  • The Standard appears to be subjective in places and not wholly measurable. For example, words like, "homely" and "attractive" were viewed as challenging to measure objectively.

8.8 Other concerns, less frequently mentioned, included the perception that the Standard focused too much on care homes as opposed to other settings; that not all of the Standard will apply to all settings; and that structuring the Standard around the principles appears forced in places. In particular, the descriptive statements under the "Compassion" principle were viewed as not entirely relevant to perceptions of compassion.

Summary of comments relating to each descriptive statement

8.9 More detailed comments were made relating to individual descriptive statements and are summarised in Annex 2, Table 5.

Views on omissions from the Standard

8.10 The main omissions suggested were:

  • More detail required on outdoor space, including the quality of the greenery; food growing environment; smoke-free environment; garden; accessibility; safe paths.
  • Smoke-free, drugs and alcohol policies and culture should be outlined.
  • The Standard should make more specific reference to early years' settings to make it more relevant to this sector.
  • There should be more on noise control and access to quiet areas. Noise from television was highlighted as a particular issue in some settings.
  • Reception areas should be mentioned, as the maintenance and appearance of these is important for setting the tone and culture.
  • Add something about being kept safe from violence and unwelcome attention from others in the setting.
  • There should be more emphasis on technological advances which enable independent living: hearing loops; flashing alarms; door entry; tele-healthcare.

Contact

Email: Chris Taylor

Phone: 0300 244 4000 – Central Enquiry Unit

The Scottish Government
St Andrew's House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG