You are here

Archived: Cricklade House Residential Home

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 April 2013
Date of Publication: 18 May 2013
Inspection Report published 18 May 2013 PDF

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 18 April 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 we asked the provider to send to us. We talked with other authorities.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in accordance with their individual care plan. People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We looked at the care plans in place for three people. Each care plan contained all the current information about their care needs.

There was evidence that the service completed a detailed needs assessment of each person and from these developed guidelines about how care should be delivered. The service responded to people's changing needs. For example a person using the service had become less mobile and could not negotiate the stairs. The home did not have a lift. The manager had assessed the person's needs and made appropriate arrangements to respond to these temporarily. The GP was consulted on the changes; a referral was made to the social worker for an urgent review of the person's needs for a nursing placement. The relative we spoke with told us they were waiting to view prospective placements.

People told us they were happy with the care they received. They said the care staff understood each person's needs and preferences and cared for them accordingly. People's health and care needs were assessed and reviewed by external professionals where appropriate. For example the GP, dentists, psychiatrists and district nurses. Records of their visits were kept.

We found that people who used the service were protected against risk of receiving inappropriate care. Care plans had written guidance for staff to follow so that they could protect people from risk. All of the people or their relatives when appropriate were involved in their care planning and reviews.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare. Each person had a care plan with details of the care and support needed. Staff identified any potential areas of risk and management plans were put in place to ensure they were safe. We saw that plans to minimise risks to people from falls were adhered to by staff, a person was unable to mobilise safely when using the stairs.