You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 December 2012
Date of Publication: 25 January 2013
Inspection Report published 25 January 2013 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Not met 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 12 December 2012, 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 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People did not always experience care, treatment and support that met their needs.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service and their relatives told us they were happy with the care they received. One person said, “It’s lovely here, they’re so kind to us”. One relative told us, “X is looked after as well as can be and as safe as can be”.

We saw staff interacting with people in a positive manner and people were encouraged to participate in activities in the home and in the community. Staff we spoke with told us about people’s needs, including people’s likes and dislikes.

We reviewed five people’s care records, spoke to six members of staff and observed people receiving care. People’s needs were not always delivered in line with their individual care records. We saw that the care records for two people stated that monthly monitoring of their weight was required. There was no evidence that this had been completed. We asked staff why this had not happened. Staff told us there were no weighing scales at the home to weigh people who could not stand. This meant that plans of care for people were not always being followed and people who were unable to stand were at risk of their weight changing without being identified by staff. Following our inspection, the provider told us they had purchased scales for people who could not stand. We have been unable to test compliance with this as this information was provided to us following our latest inspection.

One person’s care records had not been reviewed for over one year. This person’s care plan had not been changed to ensure that advice from a visiting health professional had been acted upon. When we spoke with staff they were able to tell us the person's needs and understood the professional advice. This showed us that despite care records not being kept up to date staff were well informed and did know the needs of the people who used the service.

People’s needs were not always assessed by the provider. We looked at two people's care records who were staying at Alder Grange for a short period of time for respite care. There was no assessment of need or plans of care in these care records. Basic information from the local authority was available; however this did not state the specific care that these people required. This meant there was no written information about how staff should care for these people in order to meet their needs. The provider told us that these two people were well known to the staff and staff confirmed this however, the provider agreed that new staff would require an accurate and up to date care plan to enable care needs to be met.

We observed two people being transported through the home on wheeled commodes. These were used as a wheeled chair as the seat lids were in place. These did not have footplates for people to rest their feet on. This meant that people were at risk of sustaining injuries to their legs and feet whilst being transported through the home. We asked two members of care staff why people were being transported in this way, but they were unable to answer. We informed the registered manager of this during our inspection who told us that this should not happen. Following our inspection the provider has told us that this practice has stopped. We have been unable to test compliance with this as this information was provided to us following our latest inspection.

We also observed two people eating their lunch on wheeled commodes. This meant that toileting equipment was being used in the dining area. People sitting on the wheeled commodes during lunch were also not adequately protected from pressure damage to their skin as they were no longer sitting on their pressure relieving cushions. We informed the registered manager of this during our inspection who told us that this should not happen. Following our inspection the provider has told us that this practice has stopped. We have been unable to test compliance with this as this information was provided to us following our latest inspection.

We saw that staff worked with external health ca