Registration Number: {{org_field_registration_no}}

Consent to Care and Treatment Policy (Adults 18+)

Purpose and Scope

This policy outlines how {{org_field_name}} ensures consent to care and treatment is obtained and respected in accordance with law and Care Quality Commission (CQC) standards. It applies to all staff and volunteers supporting adults (18+) with mental health needs in our service. The policy aligns with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, including CQC Regulation 11 (Need for Consent) and Regulation 13 (Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment). By adhering to this policy, the service demonstrates that no care or treatment is provided without the person’s valid consent or other lawful authority . It also ensures that any restrictive practices or potential deprivation of liberty are recognized as safeguarding issues and managed lawfully .

Policy Statement

{{org_field_name}} is committed to upholding each individual’s right to make informed choices about their care and treatment. We will obtain and document consent for all care interventions, respecting the autonomy and preferences of the people we support. Where a person lacks the mental capacity to give informed consent, we will act in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and its Code of Practice to ensure decisions are made in the person’s best interests. We have zero tolerance for abuse or unlawful treatment; any use of restraint or restrictive measures must be necessary, proportionate, and in line with legal safeguards . Unnecessary or unauthorised deprivations of liberty are not permitted and would constitute improper treatment under CQC Regulation 13. This policy also incorporates current Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) requirements and anticipates the upcoming Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) to ensure ongoing compliance with evolving law.

Legal Framework and Regulatory Compliance

All staff must understand and comply with the relevant laws and regulations concerning consent and capacity, including:

Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) – The key legislation setting out how to assess capacity and make best-interest decisions. The MCA allows certain restraint or restrictions only if necessary and in the person’s best interests, and proportionate to the risk. More stringent safeguards (DoLS/LPS) are required if such restrictions will deprive a person of their liberty.
Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) – If a person is detained or being treated under the MHA (e.g. under a Community Treatment Order or guardianship), staff must act in accordance with that Act for treatments of mental disorder. (Per Regulation 11(4), where the MHA applies, its provisions take precedence for consent to treatment of mental illness.)
CQC Regulation 11: Need for Consent – Care and treatment must only be provided with the consent of the service user or their lawful representative (e.g. donee of Lasting Power of Attorney or court-appointed deputy), except where the person lacks capacity and the provider acts in accordance with the MCA. Our consent procedures reflect this requirement and are a condition of our CQC registration.
CQC Regulation 13: Safeguarding from Abuse and Improper Treatment – We must protect service users from abuse or improper treatment. “Improper treatment” includes unlawful restraint or inappropriate deprivation of liberty under the MCA. Any care practice that includes unnecessary or disproportionate restraint, or deprives someone of liberty without lawful authority, is prohibited. To comply with Reg. 13, the service has robust procedures to prevent abuse and will only use restrictive interventions in line with legal safeguards and as a last resort.

This policy should be read alongside our Safeguarding Policy, Mental Capacity Act Policy, and any Restraint/Positive Behavior Support Policy, to ensure a cohesive approach to consent and safeguarding.

Obtaining Informed Consent

Principle: Every individual has the right to consent to or refuse proposed care and treatment, as long as they have the capacity to do so. Staff will always seek informed consent before providing support or treatment.

Communication and Information: When asking for consent, staff must provide the person with all relevant information about the care or treatment in a way they can understand. This includes explaining the nature of the intervention, its purpose, benefits, risks, and alternatives (including the option to do nothing). Explanations should be given using appropriate language, and with aids or support (e.g. simplified materials, translation, signing, or advocacy) according to the individual’s communication needs. The person should have the opportunity to ask questions and take time to consider their decision.
Voluntary Decision-Making: Consent must be given freely and without coercion. Staff must never pressure or unduly influence a person’s choice. Consent is an ongoing process – the person can change their mind and withdraw consent at any time, and this decision must be respected. Staff will regularly check that the person remains comfortable with any continuing interventions.
Recording Consent: All obtained consents (or refusals) will be documented in the person’s support plan/care records. Where written consent forms are used (for specific treatments or information sharing), these must be explained to the individual and signed by them (or their representative) before care is delivered. Implied consent (for minor day-to-day support, indicated by the person’s cooperation or behavior) should also be noted in daily records, but significant decisions require explicit consent.
Refusal of Care or Treatment: If a service user with capacity refuses an aspect of care or treatment, their decision will be respected. Staff must not impose care in these circumstances, even if they believe it is in the person’s best interests, except in situations covered by law (for example, treatment under the Mental Health Act for a detained patient). The consequences of refusing will be explained to the person (without coercion), and any alternatives offered. Persistent or significant refusals will be discussed with the care manager or multi-disciplinary team to explore solutions or review the care plan, but the person’s right to refuse remains paramount.

Mental Capacity and Best-Interest Decisions

In accordance with Regulation 11 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, if an individual is 16 or over and unable to give consent because they lack capacity, our staff must follow the MCA’s legal requirements. The following procedures apply:

Presumption of Capacity: Every adult is presumed to have capacity to make their own decisions unless assessed otherwise. Staff will never assume someone lacks capacity solely because of their age, disability, diagnosis, or appearance.
Capacity Assessments: If there is reason to believe a person may lack capacity for a specific decision, a trained staff member or relevant professional will assess the person’s mental capacity for that decision. Capacity is decision-specific and time-specific. The assessment will follow the MCA’s two-stage test (i.e., is there an impairment or disturbance in mind or brain, and does it prevent the person from understanding, retaining, using/weighing information, or communicating their decision?). Findings will be documented.
Supporting Decision-Making: Before concluding someone lacks capacity, staff must take all practicable steps to help the person decide for themselves. This includes presenting information in an accessible format, choosing the best time/location for discussions, involving people the individual trusts (if appropriate), and addressing communication needs.
Best Interest Decisions: If a person is assessed as lacking capacity for the specific decision at hand, any decision or intervention taken on their behalf must be done in their best interests (per MCA Section 4). The key factors considered will include the person’s past and present wishes, feelings, values, and beliefs, the views of their family or others close to them, and all relevant circumstances. A Best Interest decision-making meeting may be held for significant decisions, involving relevant professionals and the person’s representatives. The outcome (what decision was made and why it is in the person’s best interest) will be recorded.
Least Restrictive Option: Whether the person has capacity or not, staff must always consider less restrictive alternatives when planning care. Under Reg. 13 and MCA principle 5, if any intervention might restrict a person’s rights or freedom of action, we must ensure it is the least restrictive option to meet the person’s needs and is proportionate to the harm prevented. This is both a legal requirement and a safeguard against unwarranted control or restraint.
Involvement of Representatives: If the person who lacks capacity has a legally authorised representative, such as a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) for health and welfare or a Court-appointed deputy, that representative will be consulted and, where appropriate, will make decisions within the scope of their authority. (Note: An LPA or deputy cannot consent to a deprivation of liberty on the person’s behalf – any potential deprivation must follow the legal DoLS/LPS process.) If no family or friends are appropriate to consult for best interest decisions, an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) will be appointed for decisions that meet IMCA criteria (serious medical treatment or long-term accommodation moves, etc.).

All staff are expected to be familiar with the MCA Code of Practice and implement its guidance when caring for individuals who may lack capacity. Compliance with the MCA is monitored through care plan audits and supervision.

Consent and the Mental Health Act 1983

Most people using our supported living service are not under formal detention; however, if a service user is subject to the Mental Health Act 1983 (for example, on a Community Treatment Order or guardianship), specific rules about consent to treatment for mental disorder will apply. In such cases, staff and management will:

Verify the individual’s legal status under MHA (e.g., Section 17A Community Treatment Order, Guardianship under Section 7, etc.) and understand any conditions or powers this entails.
Adhere to Part 4 or 4A of the MHA regarding treatment: Certain treatments for mental disorder may be given without the patient’s consent if authorized by the MHA (e.g., medication after capacity assessment and second opinion, under Section 58), or subject to consent/second-opinion requirements under the Act. We will act in accordance with those provisions as required by Regulation 11(4).
Continue to involve the person in decision-making as much as possible. Being under the MHA does not remove the duty to explain treatments and consider the person’s wishes. We aim to obtain voluntary consent for treatments even when a legal authority exists to proceed without it.
Ensure that any treatment or care not directly covered by the MHA (for example, treatment of physical health conditions, or social care decisions) remains subject to the Mental Capacity Act and consent principles outlined in this policy.

Where conflict arises between the MHA and MCA (for instance, if a person under MHA lacks capacity and resistances care unrelated to their mental disorder), senior management will seek legal advice or Court of Protection input as needed to ensure lawful and ethical practice.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in Supported Living

Overview: A deprivation of liberty may occur when a person who lacks capacity to consent to their care is under continuous supervision and control and is not free to leave their residence (the “acid test” established by case law). Our policy is to avoid unnecessary deprivation of liberty, but when restrictive care arrangements are required for a person’s safety and well-being, we follow the legal safeguards strictly.

In a care home or hospital setting, the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) provide a prescribed process to lawfully authorize such arrangements. However, DoLS can only be used for care homes or hospitals. In other settings (like supported living or a person’s own home), a deprivation of liberty must be authorised by the Court of Protection. As a community supported living provider, we cannot apply DoLS ourselves or through the local authority; instead, any necessary deprivation of liberty will be pursued via a Court of Protection order.

Identifying Potential Deprivation of Liberty:

The Registered Manager (or delegated senior staff) will review each person’s care plan to identify any elements that might amount to a deprivation of liberty. This includes factors like use of locked doors or keypads preventing a person from leaving, close monitoring or restrictions on movement, one-to-one continuous supervision, or prescribed interventions that significantly restrict personal freedom. These practices, especially in combination, may constitute a deprivation of liberty for someone who cannot consent.
Staff are trained to recognize the difference between lawful restrictions (proportionate steps to prevent harm in best interests) and a deprivation of liberty which goes further. If there is continuous supervision and control of the person and they are not free to leave the placement, this meets the threshold of a deprivation of liberty as defined by the Supreme Court (Cheshire West ruling). Staff must report such situations to the manager if not already authorised.

Obtaining Authorisation (Court of Protection):

If the care plan indicates a likely deprivation of liberty for a person lacking capacity, the Registered Manager will notify the local authority (as the Supervisory Body) or the funding authority to initiate a Court of Protection application. In supported living, the local authority is responsible for seeking the Court’s authorisation for any deprivation of liberty – alzheimers.org.uk. We will cooperate fully by providing assessments and details of the care arrangements to support the application.
The Court of Protection will consider whether the person meets the criteria for deprivation of liberty under the Mental Capacity Act and, if so, may grant an order authorising the care arrangements. The order typically specifies the duration (often up to 12 months) and may include conditions to ensure the person’s rights are protected (for example, requiring regular reviews or specific provisions for social contact).
Interim Measures: While awaiting a Court decision, the team will implement the least restrictive plan possible and document why any restrictive measures are believed necessary to prevent immediate harm. We will also explore all alternatives. Any restraint or restriction used during this interim period must still comply with MCA (necessary and proportionate) and will be closely monitored. If an urgent deprivation of liberty is absolutely required to keep someone safe and it’s impractical to get an immediate court order, the manager will seek legal advice and involve the local authority urgently – emergency judicial authorization can sometimes be obtained.

Monitoring and Review of Authorisations:

Record-Keeping: The service will maintain a DoLS/DoL Authorisations Register to track all individuals in the service who are subject to a Court-authorised deprivation of liberty. This record will include the date and terms of the Court Order, any conditions attached, the expiry/renewal date, and the lead staff member for monitoring compliance.
Compliance with Conditions: If the Court of Protection attaches conditions to the authorisation (for example, requiring particular activities, contact arrangements, or periodic reports), the keyworker and manager are responsible for ensuring these conditions are fulfilled. All staff involved with the person will be made aware of the conditions to ensure full compliance.
Ongoing Oversight: The person’s keyworker and the manager will regularly review whether the care arrangements remain necessary and in the person’s best interests. If the person’s situation changes – for instance, if they regain capacity, if restrictions can be reduced, or if they express consistent objections – we will not wait for authorisation to expire. The manager will liaise with the local authority or Court of Protection to modify or discharge the order as appropriate. Keeping a person under greater restrictions than needed is not acceptable; the aim is to liberate and empower the individual as far as possible.
Renewal: Court of Protection authorisations (or DoLS standard authorisations in care homes/hospitals) are time-limited (usually for a maximum of 12 months). If continued deprivation of liberty is believed necessary beyond the current order, the manager will proactively work with the local authority to apply for renewal before the expiry date. This will involve fresh assessments of capacity and best interests to ensure up-to-date justification. If renewal is not granted or sought, the restrictive measures must cease or be adjusted to no longer constitute a deprivation of liberty.
Advocacy and Rights: Any person subject to a DoL authorisation will be informed (in an appropriate manner) of their rights to challenge the decision. Typically, the Court of Protection will appoint a relevant person’s representative (RPR) or expect the involvement of family/advocates. We will facilitate contact between the individual and their representative or an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) if one is appointed, and we will support the exercise of their rights (such as appealing to the Court if needed).

By following these steps, we ensure that no service user is deprived of their liberty without lawful authority and that we remain compliant with CQC Regulation 13. The CQC inspectors will expect to see evidence of these authorisation and review processes for any individuals with restrictive care plans in supported living.

Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) – Future Alignment

The Liberty Protection Safeguards are a new framework that will replace DoLS and will apply to all care settings, including supported living and an individual’s own home – gov.uk. LPS, once in force, will provide protection for people aged 16 and over who need to be deprived of liberty for their care or treatment and who lack capacity to consent to those arrangements – gov.uk. This policy is written to anticipate and align with LPS in the following ways:

Wider Scope: Under LPS, any setting can have a deprivation of liberty authorised, not just care homes or hospitals. This means our supported living service will fall directly under the LPS scheme (eliminating the need for separate Court applications in most cases). The policy already emphasizes identifying and lawfully authorising deprivations of liberty, which will continue under LPS with a streamlined process.
Responsible Bodies: The authorising body under LPS will depend on the setting and funding. For people in supported living arrangements, the Responsible Body is expected to be the local authority arranging the care (or sometimes an NHS body if they fund Continuing Healthcare) – gov.uk. We will cooperate with the Responsible Body by providing necessary assessments and information for LPS authorisations.
Assessments and Criteria: LPS will require three assessments – capacity assessment, a medical assessment (to confirm the person has a mental disorder), and a “necessary and proportionate” assessment to ensure the arrangements are needed to prevent harm to the person. Our staff will be trained to understand these criteria and to contribute relevant information. We will continue to uphold the principle of necessity and proportionality for any restrictive care plan, as this principle underpins both DoLS and LPS.
Consultation: LPS places emphasis on consulting with the person and those interested in their welfare. Our practice of involving individuals, families, and advocates in best-interest decisions and care planning aligns with this. We will document all consultation in anticipation of LPS requirements.
Validity Period and Renewals: LPS authorisations can last up to 12 months initially, then be renewed for another 12, and thereafter up to 36 months for long-term stable conditions. The policy’s approach to monitoring and reviewing restrictions will meet the need to decide on renewals or cessation.
Staff Training and Preparedness: Although LPS implementation in England has been delayed, we are committed to staying updated on its commencement (as of this policy revision, the government has signalled further consultation on LPS, with implementation anticipated in the near future). Management will ensure that, as LPS comes into force, all relevant staff undergo training on the new system. Our consent and DoLS lead (the Registered Manager) will transition to an LPS lead role, updating all internal procedures accordingly.

By incorporating these LPS-aligned practices now, {{org_field_name}} ensures a smooth transition once the law changes. In the interim, the existing DoLS and Court of Protection process remains in effect and is followed to the letter. This dual awareness protects individuals’ rights now and in the future.

Consent, Restrictive Practices and Safeguarding

There is a critical link between obtaining consent and safeguarding people from harm or abuse. Any care practice that overrides a person’s will, or limits their freedom, must be rigorously justified and legally sanctioned – otherwise it may constitute abuse or improper treatment. Thus, consent and safeguarding are two sides of the same coin in our service delivery:

Consent as a Safeguard of Autonomy: Respecting a person’s consent (or refusal) is fundamental to protecting their dignity and human rights. Providing treatment to someone without consent (when they have capacity) can be abusive. Therefore, our emphasis on informed consent serves to safeguard individuals from unwanted interventions. Staff are trained to recognize that ignoring a competent person’s refusal, or failing to seek consent, is unacceptable and could lead to disciplinary action and regulatory sanctions.
Restrictive Measures and Abuse Prevention: When a person lacks capacity and we consider restrictive measures (such as close supervision, use of bedrails, securing doors, or administering sedating medication), we treat these actions with great caution. According to CQC Regulation 13, using restraint or control that is not necessary or not proportionate to the risk of harm is abuse. Any restraint must be the minimum needed for safety and must be part of a documented plan in the person’s best interests. The plan is subject to multi-disciplinary review and, if it imposes significant restrictions, to external authorisation (DoLS/LPS). This process ensures transparency and oversight, thereby safeguarding the individual.
Deprivation of Liberty as a Safeguarding Issue: An unauthorised deprivation of liberty – where a person is effectively detained or restrained beyond their consent without the proper legal process – is a serious breach of human rights and is considered improper treatment. It exposes the individual to harm and the provider to legal liability. By proactively authorising and reviewing any potential deprivation of liberty, we safeguard service users from the harm of being unlawfully deprived of liberty. In line with Reg. 13(5), no service user will be deprived of liberty for care or treatment purposes without lawful authority.
Monitoring for Signs of Improper Restriction: Our safeguarding procedures include being vigilant to any signs that staff or caregivers might be imposing restrictions not agreed to or assessed. For example, if a staff member were to lock a person in a room or use physical force inappropriately, this would be identified as a safeguarding incident. All staff have a duty to report any concerns or incidents of potential abuse, including misuse of restraint or ignoring of consent. These reports will be investigated in line with our safeguarding and whistleblowing policies, and appropriate action (including notification to authorities and CQC) will be taken.
Consent and Safeguarding in Care Planning: Each support plan includes a risk assessment and a section on consent/preferences. When planning care interventions that could be restrictive (e.g., managing exit-seeking behavior in dementia, or giving medication covertly), the plan will explicitly address consent and capacity. Safeguarding measures (such as regular review meetings, involving an advocate, or setting a review date for any restrictions) are built into the plan. This ensures that any loss of liberty or choice is continually scrutinised and justified.

By linking consent processes with safeguarding oversight, we ensure that the rights and safety of service users are maintained in tandem. In practice, this means every restrictive care decision triggers a safeguard: an assessment, authorisation, consultation, or review – so the person’s welfare is always at the centre of what we do.

Staff Training and Responsibilities

All staff members, from support workers to managers, have roles in implementing this Consent to Treatment Policy effectively:

Training: Staff will receive training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005, including how to assess capacity and make best-interest decisions, as well as training on DoLS and the forthcoming Liberty Protection Safeguards. They will also be trained in understanding CQC Regulations 11 and 13, and how consent and safeguarding intersect. This training is part of induction for new employees and is refreshed at regular intervals to keep knowledge up to date. Additional focused training will be provided when LPS is introduced to ensure a clear understanding of the new procedures.
Knowledge and Application: We expect staff to be familiar with the five principles of the MCA (presumption of capacity, support to decide, unwise decisions, best interests, least restriction) and to apply them daily. Staff should know how to obtain valid consent and how to document it. They must also recognize when a person might lack capacity and then follow the proper steps (seek guidance, involve seniors, etc.). Each staff member should understand what constitutes a restraint or restrictive practice and the importance of only using these as per approved plans.
Seeking Guidance: If staff are unsure about a person’s ability to consent or the legality of an intervention, they must consult a senior or the Registered Manager before proceeding. The culture in our service encourages speaking up – it is far better to pause and check than to risk a violation of someone’s rights.
Management Oversight: The Registered Manager ({{org_field_registered_manager_first_name}} {{org_field_registered_manager_last_name}}) is responsible for the implementation of this policy. They act as the MCA/DoLS lead, advising staff and liaising with external bodies (local authority DoLS teams, Court of Protection, etc.). The Manager will also keep abreast of changes in legislation (e.g., LPS rollout plans) and ensure policies and practices are updated accordingly.
Supervision and Support: Through regular supervision meetings, managers will discuss real cases of consent and capacity with staff, reinforcing good practice and addressing any mistakes in a supportive manner. Any incidents where consent was not properly obtained or where unauthorized restraint occurred will be treated seriously – managers will investigate, take corrective action, and use it as a learning opportunity for the team.
Ethos of Respect: Ultimately, all personnel are expected to uphold an ethos of respect for the people we support – seeing each individual as an active partner in their care. This ethos, reinforced by training and leadership example, is what ensures this policy isn’t just a document, but a lived practice.

Monitoring Compliance and Policy Review

Compliance with this policy will be monitored through:

Care Plan Audits: Regular audits of service users’ care files to check that consent forms, mental capacity assessments, and best interest decision records are present as needed and kept up to date. These audits will flag any missing documentation or deviations from the policy, which the manager will address promptly.
Incident and Safeguarding Log Reviews: The management team will review logs of any incidents involving refusal of care, use of restraint, or possible deprivation of liberty. Patterns or incidents of concern will trigger a review of practice and additional training or corrective measures. All safeguarding incidents related to consent or restrictive practices will be analyzed to identify lessons learned.
Feedback: We will gather feedback from service users (and their families/advocates) about whether they feel involved in decisions and respected by staff. Complaints or feedback relating to consent (e.g., a person feeling ignored or coerced) will be investigated and the policy enforced. Positive feedback where individuals felt supported to make choices will be noted as evidence of good practice.
Management Reviews: The Registered Manager will periodically review overall compliance – for example, ensuring that any person who lacks capacity has an appropriate mental capacity assessment and (if needed) a DoLS/CoP authorisation in place. These reviews might be documented in quarterly quality monitoring reports.
CQC Inspection Preparedness: This policy and associated records will be kept ready for CQC inspectors, who will assess how we meet the Need for Consent (Reg 11) and Safeguarding (Reg 13) standards. The manager will use the CQC Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOEs) as a guide (particularly those under the Effective domain for consent, and Safe domain for safeguarding) to ensure we have evidence to demonstrate compliance.

Policy Review: This policy will be reviewed at least annually, and sooner if there are changes in legislation or guidance (for example, when Liberty Protection Safeguards come into force, or if CQC updates its regulations or expectations). The review process will involve consulting frontline staff and people who use the service (where possible) to gather input on how consent processes are working in practice. Any updates will be approved by the Registered Provider or appropriate governance committee and communicated to all staff. Old versions of the policy will be archived, and training will be provided on the new content as necessary.

References and Guidance

This policy is informed by the following key documents and guidance, which staff can refer to for further detail:

Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014: Regulation 11: Need for Consent and Regulation 13: Safeguarding from Abuse and Improper Treatment. (Available on the CQC website – Guidance for Providers.)
Mental Capacity Act 2005 and MCA Code of Practice (TSO, 2007) – especially chapters on assessing capacity, best interests, and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (note: a new Code of Practice is expected with LPS implementation).
Mental Capacity (Amendment) Act 2019 – introducing Liberty Protection Safeguards (not yet in force at time of writing). Department of Health and Social Care LPS factsheets, which confirm LPS will apply in community settings like supported living – gov.uk.
Mental Health Act 1983 and MHA Code of Practice (2015) – for guidance on consent to treatment under MHA and interface with MCA.
CQC Guidance for Providers on Consent and Safeguarding: e.g., Regulation 11 Guidance (which emphasizes providing information in an understandable way and following MCA for those lacking capacity), and Regulation 13 Guidance (which highlights zero tolerance of abuse, need for policies on restraint, and the requirement of lawful authority for any deprivation of liberty).
Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) – At a Glance briefing on DoLS and related resources on the MCA. These outline the DoLS process and stress that outside care homes/hospitals, the Court of Protection must authorise a deprivation of liberty. Also, SCIE’s materials on Liberty Protection Safeguards offer an overview of upcoming changes.
Local Authority Safeguarding Adults Board Policies – which may provide additional protocols on raising DoLS/Court of Protection applications and handling safeguarding concerns. Our service will always follow local safeguarding procedures in conjunction with this policy.

By following this Consent to Care and Treatment Policy, our supported living service ensures that we deliver care in a way that is lawful, respectful of individuals’ rights, and aligned with CQC’s fundamental standards. All staff must adhere to this policy at all times, thereby protecting service users’ autonomy and welfare while meeting our regulatory responsibilities.

Responsible Person: {{org_field_registered_manager_first_name}} {{org_field_registered_manager_last_name}}
Reviewed on: {{last_update_date}}
Next Review Date: {{next_review_date}}
Copyright © {{current_year}} – {{org_field_name}}. All rights reserved.

SL09-Consent to Care and Treatment Policy