You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 October 2012
Date of Publication: 24 October 2012
Inspection Report published 24 October 2012 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 10 October 2012, 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, talked with staff and talked with stakeholders.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

Relatives we spoke with were extremely complimentary about the care and treatment at Bailiffgate. One relative told us, “I’m so grateful for the care they get.” Another relative said, “They religiously get X to doctor’s appointments and other appointments like the chiropodist” and “They are really on top of all things medical.” Other comments included, “They get the balance right between providing a homely environment and meeting the regulations, like fire safety. They are not risk averse though, they go on holidays and X goes horse riding,” “They seem more than capable to deal with X’s diabetic turns” and “I’d recommend it to anyone. They’re very caring. She’s come on leaps and bounds from where she last was.”

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw that each person had a plan of care. This aimed to maintain the individual's welfare and took into account, people's physical, mental, emotional and social needs. This ensured that all aspects of the person's health were maintained. Most of the staff group had worked at the home for a considerable period of time and as a result, they knew people well. The people themselves seemed relaxed and comfortable in their presence. We spoke with staff who were knowledgeable about each person's care needs.

We noted that each person had a health passport. This contained detailed information about how staff should communicate with the individual concerned along with medical and personal information. This document could then be taken to the hospital or the GP to make sure that all professionals were aware of people's individual's needs.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. The files contained risk assessments of hazardous scenarios that people might experience relating to everyday matters. These showed actions taken by the staff to reduce the risks, in road safety for example. This meant staff had clear guidelines to make sure people at the home were safe.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. We noted that each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan. This detailed how people should be supported to evacuate the building in an emergency.