You are here

Archived: Ashton House Nursing Home

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 13 March 2013
Date of Publication: 3 April 2013
Inspection Report published 3 April 2013 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 13 March 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

Reasons for our judgement

Staff received appropriate professional development.

We found that the provider had a comprehensive induction programme in place, and new staff were given an employee handbook. This contained details of key policies and procedures.

We talked with three care staff and two nurses about their training and ongoing support. They confirmed that all mandatory training such as fire safety, moving and handling, infection control and safeguarding vulnerable adults was carried out during the induction programme. Staff then had yearly or two yearly updates for these, as appropriate. We viewed staff training records, and saw that these confirmed that staff were carrying out the required updates.

Nursing staff said that they were enabled to update and develop their skills and competencies. This included opportunities for training such as venepuncture, end of life care, and syringe driver training (for pain relief).

Care staff said that the company supported them in studying for Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) qualifications and diplomas, to levels 2 or 3.

We found that all of the home’s staff were given training in dementia care. The housekeeping and cleaning of the premises were contracted out to another company. However, the provider had made arrangements for the cleaning staff to take part in the home’s dementia care training programme, so that these contracted staff were able to respond to people with dementia appropriately. They had also checked that cleaning staff were trained by their own company in subjects such as infection control and health and safety; and had criminal records and Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) checks prior to working in the home. This showed that contracted staff were suitable to come into the home and work with vulnerable adults.

The staff told us that staff meetings were held on a regular basis, and included general staff meetings, and specific meetings, for example, for nursing staff, or for night staff.

Staff were supported through individual supervision which was delegated to different senior staff.