You are here

Saltmarsh House Residential Care Home Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 January 2012
Date of Publication: 12 March 2012
Inspection Report published 12 March 2012 PDF | 49.29 KB

People should be cared for in a clean environment and protected from the risk of infection (outcome 8)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Providers of services comply with the requirements of regulation 12, with regard to the Code of Practice for health and adult social care on the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 27/01/2012, checked the provider's records, observed how people were being cared for, talked to staff, reviewed information from stakeholders and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

People using the service were cared for in a clean environment. The home maintained appropriate standards of cleanliness. Overall, we found Saltmarsh House Residential Care Home had met this essential standard.

User experience

We spoke with one person who told us the home was cleaned every day and that his room was “clean and tidy.”

Other evidence

During our inspection, we walked around the home and we saw that it was mostly clean. We inspected six bedrooms and found a small quantity of high level dust in two of them. We highlighted this to the registered manager who immediately arranged for the areas to be cleaned. The remaining four bedrooms we looked at were clean and tidy. We inspected all bathrooms and toilets and they all looked clean.

There was antiseptic gel available for members of staff and visitors in place at the entrance and at various places including toilets and other prominent areas throughout the home. There were signs in the toilets and other areas reminding members of staff and visitors of the importance of hand hygiene.

The home was using the Health and Social Care Act 2008 Code of Practice on the prevention and control of infections and related guidance and members of staff we spoke with, understood their responsibilities in relation to this. For example, the home had an annual statement on infection control. It had identified a lead person who was responsible for infection prevention and control and she had a job description that included this role.

During our visit, the registered manager showed us the policies that were in place to prevent and control infections. We spoke with members of staff who told us that they had read these policies.

The deputy manager undertook daily checks of the overall cleanliness in the home. These checks were undertaken once a day and all rooms, toilets, bathroom, kitchen, conservatory, dining and living rooms were checked to ensure that they were clean. We saw a checklist that was used by the deputy manager and where there were concerns, action had been taken immediately. For example, in one of the daily checks undertaken, the deputy manager identified that the conservatory was not properly cleaned. This was reported to all staff through the daily communication book and subsequently appropriate cleaning was undertaken and this recorded in the book.

The home also undertook six monthly audits of infection prevention and control standards to ensure the home was following the guidance set out in the Code of Practice. We saw the records of the last audit in September 2011. The audit had identified that the home needed to increase the frequency of cleaning certain high use areas such as the entrance, conservatory, the dining and living rooms. We saw that during the inspection, a cleaner cleaned the dining room once people had finished their lunch.

Members of staff we spoke with told us they had received training in how to prevent and control infection. The staff training records confirmed that all members of staff had attended training in June 2011. The next follow up training session was scheduled for April 2012.