You are here

Archived: Florence House - Peterborough

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 25 July 2014
Date of Publication: 6 September 2014

Overview

Inspection carried out on 25 July 2014

During a routine inspection

A adult social care inspector for adult social care carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer the five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, relatives and staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

Records we looked at showed us that risk assessments were completed where a risk had been identified. Measures were described and in place to reduce or eliminate such risks. Requirements under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were recognised by members of staff as were deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS). One person who was under a DoLS registration was due for this to be reviewed as their behaviours had changed.

Staff confirmed that they had completed regular training and we saw a list of dates when the staff refresher training was due to be updated. This showed that people were supported by members of staff who knew how to provide support in a safe and appropriate way

Full information was on display to provide people with enough detail to take any concerns they may have to the relevant organisation. This information included details of the type of procedures and actions that would be taken by the supporting agency. We saw the actions that had been taken when a person had verbally complained. This was fully documented to show that the provider had taken appropriate action and reached an acceptable conclusion for the person concerned.

Records showed that equipment such as hoists had been regularly serviced and fire checks had been completed on extinguishers. This supported the safety of people who lived at the service, as well as the safety of visitors and staff.

Is the service effective?

Our observations showed us that people who lived at the service were relaxed and confident when they discussed matters with members of staff. Staff took action when they saw anyone who appeared to be in need of support. People who lived at the service all had positive comments about members of staff and the care and support they received.

Records contained minutes of meetings that had been held with people who lived at Florence House. These minutes contained details of discussions and any actions that may have been needed following these meetings. There was also a signature and date that showed when a required action had been completed. This indicated that the service responded to people’s needs in an acceptable time frame.

Is the service caring?

Our observations showed us that people living in the service were treated with respect at all times. Discussions with members of staff showed us that they knew the routines that people had chosen and were aware of their care and support needs.

We saw that people were dressed cleanly and appropriately for the weather on the day of our inspection, this showed that people’s support needs had been carried out.

We saw that staff spoke with respect and in an appropriate manner when they provided support or care to people in the home. One person who lived at the service told us that staff were, “The very best there is.”

Is the service responsive?

We saw that people's individual physical needs were being met. People were gently encouraged to decide what they wanted to eat at lunch time. We observed the lunch time meal and saw this was a calm and relaxed time. Staff did not rush anyone and they allowed time for the individual to fully understand their meal choices and the options offered to them. This showed us that staff supported and involved people who lived at the service.

Is the service well led?

Staff explained that they undertook regular training and we saw a list of dates when

the staff refresher training was due to be updated. This showed that people were supported by members of staff who knew how to provide support in a safe and appropriate way.

Quality assurance systems were in place and regular quality audits were completed for all areas of the service. We saw records that clearly documented the observations that had been made when any improvements were needed. The completion dates of tasks were also recorded to show when any follow up was needed. The manager completed weekly and monthly audits that ensured the quality of the service was monitored and checked regularly to ensure this was an acceptable standard at all times.