You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 July 2014
Date of Publication: 7 August 2014
Inspection Report published 07 August 2014 PDF | 85.4 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 8 July 2014

During a routine inspection

We met eight people that lived in the home and two staff as well as six visitors. Some of the people we saw in the home had memory problems or difficulty with communicating their needs. We spoke directly with five people living in the home, they were happy with the care they received and with the staff who cared for them.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

At our inspection we gathered evidence that helped answer our five questions.

Is the service safe?

The people who used the service told us they felt safe in the home and trusted the staff. People told us. “Staff are lovely, really friendly" and "I like all the staff."

Another person said. “Staff listen to me, I am quite happy here and I feel well cared for.”

We had received information of concern that people were not receiving the care and support they needed. We looked at support plans and spoke with people who used the service. People told us they were well looked after.

The provider and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Is the service effective?

The people who used the service told us they liked living at Shipley House. One person said “If I don’t feel well they call a doctor for me.”

We looked at how the staff supported people with diabetes and saw they received suitable chiropody treatment as well as a suitable diet. Staff also contacted the necessary healthcare professionals for advice when they needed to.

Is the service caring?

People told us they were pleased with the staff at Shipley Hall. One person said. “They treat me like a queen; I couldn’t be better looked after.” We observed staff throughout the day. They did not rush people and took their time when providing support, which was done with dignity and respect.

Is the service responsive?

We had received information of concern saying the home had had an infestation of cockroaches. We looked at records and saw that as soon as this was identified the provider brought in a specialist pest control company to deal with the problem. They also had retained the company to carry out three monthly checks to ensure they remained free from infestation.

Is the service well-led?

The registered manager has been in post for just over a year and is slowly making changes to the support plans and improving the environment. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and were able to tell us what improvements the registered manager had made.

We discussed how people who used the service and their relatives were involved in the running of the home. We were shown a quality questionnaire but there was no response recorded as to actions taken. The registered manager told us they had carried out improvements as a result of comments and would record these in future.

We had received information of concern saying that people were frightened to complain to the provider. We spoke with people who used the service and they told us they felt confident to speak to the registered manager. One person told us. “Staff listen to me, I am quite happy here and I feel well cared for.” However when we spoke with visitors three out of the six visitors said they did not feel able to raise any concerns with the provider due to their previous negative experience.

We looked at the audits of the building and associated activities, we found they had not been recorded since April 2014, however the registered manager was able to send us evidence following the inspection to show they had been carried out but recorded separately. We also asked the registered manager if they had an annual routine maintenance plan for the service. We were told that they did not have but refurbished rooms as and when they thought they needed to do it. The provider sent us evidence following the inspection to show that they visited the service regularly and carried out audits from which repairs and maintenance actions were carried out.