Archived: Brandon Trust - 185 Passage Road Care Home

We also found care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that did not ensure people's safety and welfare.

People had not been protected from environmental infection control risks in the home.

There had not been enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

The provider did not have an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

The provider wrote to us and informed us they would be compliant in the outcome areas by 31 October 2013.

Action had been taken so that where people did not have capacity to consent; the provider ensured they acted in accordance with legal requirements.

Care was planned and delivered in a way that partially ensured people's safety and welfare. There was more information in care plans about people's needs. Risks to people were not effectively managed. Risk assessment records did not set out what risks people may face.

Action had been taken so that people were protected from environmental infection control risks.

There was a quality checking system of staffing levels so that there were enough staff to meet people's needs.

There was a system to assess and monitor the quality of service. Shortfalls identified in risk assessment records had not been followed up.

We found that the people were asked for their consent for day to day decisions around their care. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider had not acted in accordance with legal requirements or their own policy to ensure that people's best interests were being met. This was because mental capacity assessments had not been reviewed as planned.

The provider's infection control procedures did not meet the recommended guidelines for the prevention and control of infection within the home.

The home had safe systems in place for the storing and administering of medicines and staff received appropriate training in this area.

During our inspection we observed that there were not enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

The provider had systems in place to monitor quality assurance, however we found that in practice these had been ineffective.

We talked with three support workers about how they supported people who used the service.

People had positive views to share with us about what life was like for them at the home.

Examples of comments we were told included, 'They're very nice here, they take me out '. 'The management are nice'. 'The staff are helpful to me'. 'The staff are not too bad'.

People told us they felt safe living at the home and they also knew how to raise concerns if they had them.

People were effectively supported by enough suitable staff to live a fulfilling life in the home and in the community.

People were supported to make complaints about the service and when they were made they were properly acted upon by the provider.