You are here

Burnside Court Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 25 February 2013
Date of Publication: 22 March 2013
Inspection Report published 22 March 2013 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 25 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

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

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at five care files during our visit these were well organised and easy to follow. The first section of each folder contained a Residents Profile. This was a summary of key details including things that were important to the person, such as “loves interaction with staff” and “wears a hearing aid and without this is unable to communicate.” The profile included risks that staff needed to be aware of. Care plans had a picture of the person and noted the person’s preferred name. The care plan included a Personal Fact Notes sheet. This had a range of questions that included historical details, such as where the person was born and went to school to family details and hobbies and current information including likes and dislikes The manager told us that it was sometimes very difficult to complete these sheets because it usually relied on families being able to provide the necessary details. Sometimes people did not have close families and some families did not have the information. We noted that three of these sheets had been fully completed in the five files we looked at. This showed that the organisation tries to obtain important historical and current person centred information that will enhance the care offered.

Care plans covered all key areas of need such as communication, mobility, continence, etc. Each section of the care plan included possible risks and detailed the service to be provided and objectives to be met. With each care plan there was a sheet that noted when a review of the care plan had been undertaken and what, if any, changes had been made as a result of the review. In all of the files we reviewed care plans had been reviewed monthly. On an annual basis the person’s close relatives were invited to review the care plan and also asked if they wanted to be involved on a more regular basis. One relative we spoke with told us that they were “very involved in the annual review (of the person’s care plan).” In one file we reviewed we saw a letter to relatives inviting them to a care plan review. This showed that the organisation regularly reviews care plans and invites relatives to be involved in reviews at least once a year.

Information in the care plans was presented in a person centred way and there was lots of evidence of personal preferences being recorded. For example in the “Dietary Preferences” section of one file, in addition to noting the person’s preferred food and their preferred meal times, the notes stated that the person “likes to sit with other ladies at meal times but likes to sit up last and move straight back into a comfortable chair in the lounge”. We observed this happening during our visit. In another person’s care plan in the Communication section we read that the person was “unable to engage in meaningful conversation” and that staff “need to anticipate needs and note body language”. The care plan also noted that staff should “talk slowly and use short sentences, smile and have positive body language”. This showed that the organisation pays attention to individual needs and care plans included sufficient details to ensure the person’s needs were met appropriately.

In care plans we noted risk assessments of mobility and a general risk assessment forms. In one file we saw reference to “risk of falling” and in another “risk of going out without an escort”. In another file it was noted in the “Diet and Weight” section that the person was “at risk of not drinking enough”. The care plan noted that the person should be “encouraged to take fluids and if not wanting a hot drink offer a cold drink and vice versa. Encourage little and often”. This file also contained a “Use of Bed Rail Assessment” completed on 30.08.12 and reviewed monthly since then with the last review on 12.02.13. We noted Waterlow Skin Condition assessments in flies we looked at. These had been reviewed on a monthly basis. This showed that the organisation identifies possible risks to people and takes action to minimise th