Archived: Pondside

Is the service safe?

Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The detailed evidence supporting our summary can be read in our full report.

The service currently has one service user and has recently recruited a new manager.

Is the service safe?

We found the service was safe.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The new manager told us they had not had a need to make an application but in light of recent changes in legislation, they would be getting advice from the Supervisory body.

We found the service carried out the recruitment and selection in line with the 'Recruitment Policy and Procedure'. Job applications were fully completed with full employment history and reasons for leaving. Certificates of qualifications were requested at the time of interview. Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work. The new manager told us 'When I came for my interview I had to provide proof of identification, national insurance number, references and certificates of qualifications. I could not start this job until the disclosure barring service check (DBS) had been done and references obtained.' The documents reviewed in their staff file verified what they had said. This meant the service ensured people were of good character because the relevant checks had been carried out.

Is it well-led?

A new manager had recently been recruited in post. Therefore, it is too early to answer this question.

We saw various health and safety checks were undertaken. For example, we looked at the daily temperature checks undertaken in July 2014. We saw temperature checks were carried out on the fridge, freezer, hot water, radiator and rooms. Staff recorded the readings, dates they were taken and if there were any concerns. All checks undertaken were up to date with the signatures of the staff who undertook the task. The home has brought in a new quality assurance system to help monitor, assess and analyse their service provision. This system would further enhance the current system used and if used make the whole process effective.

Pre-assessments were undertaken to establish people's needs. These were used to develop person-centred care plans tailored to people's individual needs. Risks were identified and plans were put in place to minimise them. This ensured the welfare and safety of people who used the service.

Staff members demonstrated understanding of the safeguarding policy and told us what they would do to safeguard people who used the service and if they suspected abuse had taken place. This meant staff members were aware of the procedures to follow when they suspected abuse had occurred.

We found job application forms were partially completed and job references were not sought in order to aid the assessment of staff members' conduct in previous employment.

There were no appropriate systems for gathering, recording and evaluating information about the quality and safety of the care, treatment and support the service provided.

People were aware of the complaints system. Contact details for the Local Adult Social Services, Local Government Ombudsman and advocate were made available for people or those acting on their behalf. This enabled people to take their complaints further if they were still dissatisfied with the service.