You are here

Archived: Chaseley Bungalows

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 13, 21 August 2014
Date of Publication: 18 September 2014
Inspection Report published 18 September 2014 PDF | 107.7 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 13 August 2014 and 21 August 2014, 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 staff, reviewed information given to us by the provider and reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services. We reviewed information sent to us by other authorities, talked with commissioners of services and talked with other authorities.

Our judgement

The provider had a system in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at the systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided.

There had been a number of staff changes at the bungalows. This had meant that auditing, staff meetings and care reviews had not taken place regularly.

We saw that since the new senior staff member and deputy manager had commenced working at the Bungalows new systems had been devised. However, the provider may find it useful to note that although some improvements had been made, auditing systems implemented needed time to become fully embedded. We found that there were areas that still required improvement to ensure that the monitoring of the service was robust.

Staff meetings had taken place; these included a new schedule of meetings and further ad hoc meetings used to inform staff of changes or for training. For example training in relation to appropriate documentation.

We saw that questionnaires had been sent to people living at the Bungalows. We saw that these had been done in May 2014. Further questionnaires had recently been sent out to people, and the manager was awaiting the return of these. A full report and action plan would then be devised and actions taken. We saw that these included the option of requesting a one to one meeting with management if the person wished to discuss any issues in confidence.

We saw that a medication audit had been completed. A number of other systems of auditing were in place, these included health and safety, a summary of incidents and a daily checklist. The daily checklist was completed by the trained nurse each day to ensure that people had received appropriate care, documentation had been completed and appointments attended if appropriate.

We looked at accidents and incident reports. We saw that these had not always been completed when incidents had taken place. We found that information had been documented in statements or in people’s daily care records. The provider may find it useful to note that this meant that the summary of incidents completed had not been accurate, as not all incidents had been correctly documented.

The maintenance employee was on holiday at the time of the inspection so we were unable to access some of the documentation in relation to maintenance checks and servicing. However, we saw that equipment had up to date stickers with dates in place to show that regular checks had taken place. This included portable appliance testing which had taken place throughout the home. Staff spoken with told us that they reported any maintenance issues in the maintenance book and on the computer. Most issues were rectified immediately as the maintenance employee was ‘on site’ most days. For more serious issues we saw that the service had contact numbers for outside agencies to respond to issues if they arose.

We spoke with the deputy manager who told us that audits had not taken place to monitor infection control. However, care staff had recently taken on ‘link’ roles. This included infection control and a number of other areas within the service. This had recently commenced so we were unable to see any evidence of how this would look in practice.

People we spoke with told us they were aware of how to make a complaint. At the time of the inspection there were no current complaints on going at the Bungalows.