You are here

Archived: Dean Wood Manor

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 August 2014
Date of Publication: 5 September 2014
Inspection Report published 05 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 12 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 carers and / or family members, talked with staff and reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services. We talked with 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

Appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures were in place at the home and were reviewed and updated regularly and as and when changes occurred. We spoke with four members of staff who were all aware of the policies and had access to them when required. They were able to give examples of safeguarding concerns and the reporting mechanism.

Staff with whom we spoke said they had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults, which was further evidenced via the training records. This training was refreshed on an annual basis to ensure knowledge and awareness was kept up to date.

We looked at some recent safeguarding concerns which had been addressed and followed up appropriately. We spoke with staff about particular risks due to the nature of some of the conditions of the people who used the service. Some people at the home living with dementia could occasionally become agitated, verbally or physically aggressive and others could become the victims of this behaviour. Staff were able to give examples of techniques used in these situations and we saw there were people who were looked after on a one to one basis as a response to incidents of this nature that had happened.

Each care file we looked at included specific documentation around the person’s vulnerability to the risk of abuse. A copy of any safeguarding alerts in which the person had been involved was kept in the file. Some people had behaviour charts to monitor behaviour that challenged and GPs were brought in to look at addressing the situation with medication changes if this was identified as an option.

Staff were aware of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), used when a person needs to be deprived of their liberty in their own best interests. There were five people currently subject to DoLS and we saw evidence that staff at the home were working closely with the local authority to identify further applications to be made. This was due to the recent changes to the DoLS thresholds.