You are here

Archived: The Paddocks

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 May 2014
Date of Publication: 5 July 2014
Inspection Report published 05 July 2014 PDF | 81.77 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

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 8 May 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

The provider had an effective quality monitoring system in place which included spot checks. We saw that the manager regularly audited areas such as kitchen records, staffing hours, cleaning records, food charts, daily notes, bathing records, medical records, fire testing and care plans. If any of the audits identified an area of concern, we saw that this information was passed to staff in team meetings, daily communications and where appropriate, during individual supervisions.

The provider had recently sent out a quality assurance survey to families, there had been some responses but not all had been received. We saw that out of the six responses received so far, the home had received scores of good and very good. We reviewed the quality assurance survey for 2012/2013, we saw that overall the provider had been scored ‘very good’ and people had said that they were happy with the service. Comments that had been received were that the staff were ‘helpful, respectful, patient, and supportive’.

We reviewed the comments book for the home and we observed that from January to April, the home had received six comments which were all positive. People wrote comments about how safe they felt in the home and how happy they were, and that they enjoyed having the dogs in the home.

This showed that people who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment.