You are here

Archived: Cricklade House Residential Home

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 7 December 2012
Date of Publication: 1 January 2013
Inspection Report published 1 January 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we have gathered about Cricklade House Residential Home, looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, reviewed information sent to us by other organisations and carried out a visit on 7 December 2012. We observed how people were being cared for, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care, talked with people who represent the interests of people who use services and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and talked with stakeholders.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. All four people who used the service were able to express their views. They had their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service was provided. Individual preferences for same gender carers was respected, female staff only were employed in the home.

A person we spoke with told us they enjoyed living in a small domestic style setting, they said "it is a homely place and we sit down together at mealtimes just like a family".

A relative spoken with said "it is quite a special house and such caring staff, it is the most appropriate setting with low numbers to be cared for".

People's religious needs were met. One person liked to attend Sunday worship, and staff supported them to do this.

The environment was inclusive and staff practices observed promoted the privacy and dignity of people. A carer demonstrated this; we saw how they managed sensitively a delicate situation in continence management and helped the person appropriately.

We saw that the manager and staff explained to people their support options. Staff recognised the need for suitable stimulation and were actively listening to and involving people in activities.

People were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. All staff were aware of communal activities and supported all four people to attend a healthy living centre run by a dementia group. Staff stayed at the centre for the duration of the session. A person told us how much they enjoyed attending this and said "it makes a break for us all to go out for one day every week".

Peoples’ diversity, values and human rights were respected. Relatives we spoke with said they felt the staff treated people with respect and maintained their dignity. A person told us staff understood their specific cultural needs and staff kept their skin creamed daily.