You are here

Archived: Westbourne House

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 September 2014
Date of Publication: 30 September 2014
Inspection Report published 30 September 2014 PDF

People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

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 8 September 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff, reviewed information given to us by the provider and reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services.

Our judgement

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Reasons for our judgement

People we spoke with said they felt ‘very safe’ living at Westbourne House. They said, “I feel safe and supported here”, “I feel safe, the staff are always around to help and the night staff look after me, they keep calling in my room to see I’m safe. I am glad they do.”

We saw copies of the local authority Adult Protection Procedures and whistleblowing procedures were available to provide guidance for staff.

The manager was aware of the need to report any incidents to us and the local authority in line with written procedures to uphold people's safety.

Staff spoken with were clear of the actions to take if they suspected abuse or if an allegation was made so people were protected. Staff confirmed they were aware of the safeguarding and whistle blowing policies in place. They had access to these so they were aware of important information to help keep people safe. Staff spoken with were confident the manager would take any concerns seriously and report them to relevant bodies.

We looked at the staff training records. These showed staff had been provided with training on safeguarding people to ensure full and safe procedures were adhered to.

The service had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards although no applications had needed to be submitted. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one. This meant that people would be safeguarded as required.

The service had a policy and procedure in relation to supporting people who used the service with their personal finances. The home managed money for some people. We saw the service had a system in place to manage each person’s money and a sample of documentation was reviewed to demonstrate the operation of the system.

We saw finance sheets for money put into and taken out of people’s accounts had been signed by at least two members of staff or a staff member and the person who used the service. We saw evidence that the manager audited these records on a regular basis. This meant that any discrepancies would be found quickly and promptly rectified.