Mental Capacity Act (MCA) Directory

The MCA (Mental Capacity Act) Directory has been developed to provide a single space for the sharing of useful information and tools to aid the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Here you will find publications, videos, and academic research that professionals across Health and Social Care may find useful in their day-to-day practice.

Case study eight: Mrs C – improvements to accommodation

A case study focusing on a care home resident needing improvements to their accommodation, explaining how after intervention by an IMCA the decision was made to go ahead with the repair work. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, and shows how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study four: Mrs Z – acquired brain injury

A case study focusing on a patient with an acquired brain injury, needing a best interests decision made as to whether she should have a PEG feed inserted. The case shows how the correct application of the principles of the MCA ensured the least restrictive option was explored and the patient was able to make improvements in eating and drinking so the PEG was no longer needed. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, to show how IMCAs can act as a powerful...

Case study nine: Mrs L – challenging capacity assessments

A case study describing how a decision had to be made about the permanent care arrangements for a service user temporarily placed in a care home, which appeared to be against her wishes. With IMCA intervention the resident was able to return home with a care package which she was more amenable to. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, showing how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study one: Mrs P – cognitive impairment

A case study focusing on a patient with cognitive impairment, showing how the intervention by an IMCA ensured she was able to return to live at home with her dog instead of being admitted to a care home that did not allow dogs. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, and shows how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study seven: Mrs B - decision to resuscitate

A case study focusing on patient decision to require representation in deciding whether she should be resuscitated and the intervention by an IMCA. It has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, showing how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study five: Mrs H – return home with family conflict

A case study focusing on patient due to be discharged from hospital while there was disagreement amongst family members about where she should go. It shows how an IMCA intervention ensured that a decision could be made for the patient to be discharged to a 24-hour residential care placement, which was the only place where her complex needs could be met. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, and shows how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack...

Case study three: Mr N – move to care home with no consultation

A case study focusing on a patient not being consulted in the decision about being discharged from hospital into a care home. However, after meeting with an IMCA it was decided that he did in fact have the capacity to decide where he wanted to live and was returned home with an appropriate care package. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, and shows how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study eleven: Mr J – wanting more independence upon moving from a mental health rehabilitation unit

A case study focusing on a patient wanting more independence upon moving from a mental health rehabilitation unit. It describes how the patient, supported by an IMCA, was able to move into supported living accommodation where he can be more independent. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, showing how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Case study two: Mr R – dementia non-MCA compliant hospital discharge

A case study focusing on dementia non-MCA compliant hospital discharge, without an appropriate advocate involved in the decision-making process. It explains how the IMCA involved raised concerns about how the hospital discharge process fits into the MCA and how important the role of an IMCA is in ensuring decisions are made in the best interests of the relevant individuals. The case study has been drawn together by the Department of Health, the Care Quality Commission, and POhWER, a major provider of advocacy services, showing how IMCAs can act as a powerful support to people who may lack capacity.

Utilities against scams a practical guide: supporting your customers and helping employees to spot, stop and prevent a scam

This guide is for utility organisations of all sizes and in all sectors including energy, water and communications. It offers guidance on how to increase employees’ understanding of scams and recommends processes and practices to support utility companies in preventing, spotting and stopping individuals becoming a victim of a scam.

GP FAQ

Frequently asked questions, providing guidance for general practitioners around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983, decision making, identifying a deprivation of liberty, authorising a deprivation of liberty in hospital and care home settings and in domestic settings, and deprivation of liberty.