You are here

Archived: Cedar House

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 17 December 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we observed positive interactions between staff and four people using the service. We spoke with two of them. We spoke with three relatives and three members of staff including the manager. A relative told us, "I love the small group,. X has a fantastic rapport with staff. I can walk away, feeling that X is safe". Another relative told us that the respite service was a lifeline for them.

We saw that people were relaxed with staff. Non-verbal means were used where verbal communication was not possible. People were treated with dignity and respect and were well supported when they needed reassurance.

People were supported to make everyday decisions. Where they were unable to make more complex decisions the provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Care records contained detailed information about people's needs and they had access to a range of health care specialists where this was necessary. Risk assessments were in place and had been reviewed regularly. We saw that written and verbal communication with families of people using the service were paramount.

There was a system in place to ensure that people were protected against the risks associated with medicines.

We saw that there were sufficient numbers of qualified and experience staff on duty to meet people's needs.

The complaints procedure was available to people using the service and their relatives. The procedure was available in pictorial form.

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

We did not speak to people about this outcome as we did not visit the home to carry out this review. We used the information that the provider had sent us since we last visited the home.

Records showed care plans were stored safely. The provider had a system in place to ensure people’s personal data was not kept for longer than necessary.

Inspection carried out on 21 June 2012

During a routine inspection

Cedar house provides respite care and emergency accommodation for people with a learning disability. It is registered to provide care for up to six people. On the day we visited there were four people using the service. The people normally stay at Cedar House between four and six days. The majority of people who use Cedar House visit on a regular basis.

We haven’t been able to speak to people using the service because they were unable to answer direct questions about their care. We gathered evidence of people’s experiences of the service by reviewing their care plans, comment cards and the complaints log. During our visit we observed the care people received.

We could see there were good relationships between people using the service and members of staff. People appeared to be happy and relaxed in their surroundings. Staff told us there was no set meals, people were asked each day what they would like to eat.

We saw one person’s family had sent a card which said, “Thank you all so much for the time, patience and care you have given [Name]. You have made such a difference to our lives when [Name] has come to you for respite care.”

The manager explained how care records were managed and stored. We found records of people who no longer used the service were being kept longer than necessary and were not stored safely.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)