You are here

Archived: Laureston House Residential Home

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 15 October 2013
Date of Publication: 9 November 2013
Inspection Report published 09 November 2013 PDF | 75.41 KB

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 15 October 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, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. These included observing the care and interactions between the people and staff and talking to the people who used the service and relatives. During these observations and discussions we noted people being supported with their needs and being offered choices. Staff were seen offering people choices and supporting people with their needs.

People spoken with indicated that the staff treated them well and that they felt reassured to be in their company. They indicated that they received the health and personal care they needed and that they were comfortable in the service. We saw that the people who used the service were making choices about their lives and were part of the decision process. People had their own individual routines which were respected. One person who used the service said "staff are very good. I have no concerns". Another person said “Food is great, lovely choices and plenty of it”. One other person who lived in the service said "If I was unhappy I would talk to the manager. Staff look after me well. I have no concerns".

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We reviewed and discussed with the manager the care records of four residents at the home. These had sufficient detail and guidelines about the support needed to meet people’s needs. They had an assessment of need, details on how to support the person and what assistance needed to be provided. Detailed guidance for staff was available so that they supported people consistently with actions that achieved the desired goal. The care plans were regularly updated. This meant people received the care they wanted and their needs were met.

There was guidance to staff about how a person’s needs or wishes were to be supported in areas such as personal hygiene and eating. The care plans had some common themes for each person but also particular things about people, and highlighted what people could and could not do for themselves, making them individual and person centred. Risk assessments were in place in all the care plans seen and evidence was available that they had been reviewed.

A healthcare professional spoken with said she did not have any concerns about the quality of care within the service and stated she and her colleagues visited regularly and found the staff and management to be responsive to recommendations made and that communication was good.

Care records and specific health care records seen, showed that people had access to a range of health care professionals including dentists and opticians when needed and they had regular health checks.

A range of activities were organised on an individual and group basis. During our visit we noted a range of activities taking place. Staff were also seen interacting with people who used the service on a one to one basis.