You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 September 2013
Date of Publication: 1 April 2014
Inspection Report published 01 April 2014 PDF

People should be cared for in safe and accessible surroundings that support their health and welfare (outcome 10)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are in safe, accessible surroundings that promote their wellbeing.

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 11 September 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 who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

Reasons for our judgement

The provider had taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained.

A person living at the home told us “It’s fabulous isn’t it. I just love the way it has turned out. We can sit outside on the veranda or sit in here and look out at the world going by. I love my en -suite bathroom.”

A relative told us “This is a lovely place to visit. The rooms are so nice and spacious."

Another person told us "I love all the glass and light.”

We carried out a tour of the premises including the new extension which had been completed within the last year. The home was designed to create a light and bright environment for people, with large open spaces for people to enjoy communal activities, dine and to walk around unimpeded. The layout was arranged to include attractive sheltered courtyards with interesting features and a decked veranda with outdoor furniture for the warmer weather. People were able to walk around a bright and interesting outer corridor which took them in a sweeping circuit of the home back to a lounge and dining area which was the hub of activity on the ground floor. Staff told us this arrangement was particularly helpful for people who may have a dementia related condition and who enjoyed moving around the home as part of their daily life. The home was sufficiently warm, well lit and ventilated and provided a pleasant living space.

The outdoor space was well designed with attractive gardens and areas where people could carry out gardening in tubs and raised beds.

People who required a key to their individual room doors had one, while staff at the home could gain access if required in an emergency. This ensured that people’s privacy was respected.

Bathrooms were spacious and most were wet rooms, where people could shower or bathe in an environment which was easy to manage. Bathrooms had assisted bathing and showers so that all people could access the facilities.

We saw that the home had a sensory room, which was laid out with low lighting, fibre optic lights, textured materials and relaxing chairs. Staff told us this was useful for people to come to when they wanted time out to sit and listen to soothing music or to regain a sense of calm when they were distressed and was particularly useful for those people with a dementia.

Throughout the home we saw small lounges and quiet areas where people could sit privately with friends or relatives. Staff told us that people were either seen privately by health professionals in their rooms or in a private room on the ground floor.

We saw that the home had environmental risk assessments which took account of the risks to safety for people at the home; trip and slip hazards, bathing and moving and handling risks. This ensured that people were protected from avoidable risks to their well- being.

The home had a contract in place for the removal of clinical waste and risk assessments were in place in relation to the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (CoSHH).

The senior carers on duty told us that the service had a security policy and that the person in charge checked the security of the premises regularly. The service had electronically operated doors so that no person could enter or leave the premises without staff knowledge.

The service employed a maintenance worker who completed tasks which were highlighted by staff during their day to day work.