You are here

Archived: Cedarwood Nursing Home Limited

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 4 September 2013
Date of Publication: 24 September 2013
Inspection Report published 24 September 2013 PDF | 62.76 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 4 September 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff, reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services, reviewed information sent to us by other authorities and talked with commissioners of services. We talked with other authorities.

Our judgement

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

Reasons for our judgement

During our inspection on 11 June 2013 we found that the provider did not take into account any complaints and comments made by people who use the service, their relatives or staff to improve the service. This had had a major impact on people as they had experienced poor service for at least six months. During our inspection on 4 September 2013 we spoke with four people who used the service. They all told us that the service had improved greatly in the last few weeks and they had had the opportunity through residents meetings and speaking with the new manager to make their opinions known. They all told us that the concerns that they raised about their environment, the food and cleanliness had been taken into account and seen the level of service they receive improve through making their concerns known. We looked at the minutes of the residents and relatives meetings and found that where concerns had been raised that these had been recorded. We could see evidence throughout the home that improvements had been made. We looked at the minutes of the staff meetings that had been held, and found that the comments made by staff had been taken into account and this had led to improvements within the service. This meant that people who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and they were acted on.

During our inspection on 11 June 2013 we found that the people who used the service had no running hot water which meant that there were no shower or bath facilities. People had complained about the lack of running hot water, they had also complained about a hole in the roof in the lounge and about the lack of staff in the afternoons. This had had a major impact on people’s care as the provider had not responded to any of these complaints for at least six months. During our inspection on 4 September 2013 we spoke with four people who used the service, they all told us that there was running hot water, the roof had been mended and there were staff available most of the time. People told us that the new manager was approachable and that they had been able to discuss their concerns about their care with her. We saw that in the entrance to the home there was a book for people and their relatives to make comments and complaints, which had been used. We spoke with the manager about how people raised their concerns, the manager demonstrated how people’s complaints had been incorporated into the plans to improve the service such as updating furniture, re-employing the chef and ensuring enough staff were on duty. This meant that the provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service.

During our inspection on 11 June 2013 we found that the provider did not have an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage the risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others. During our inspection on 4 September 2013 we found that the provider had commenced regular monitoring of the service in the form of audits and spot checks. We saw that the audits had highlighted areas for improvement. There were action plans on how they were to improve the areas that did not come up to standard and these had been signed off by the manager when they had been completed. The provider had also arranged for another manager from another location to do audits to ensure quality control of the audits. We saw that the manager had a checklist that was carried out daily and where problems were identified that these were rectified promptly. This meant that that the provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage the risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others.