You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 24 January 2013
Date of Publication: 1 March 2013
Inspection Report published 1 March 2013 PDF | 89.93 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

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 24 January 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 and talked with staff.

We were supported on this inspection by an expert-by-experience. This is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with a number of people who lived in the home and three relatives of people who used the service about the care they received. All the people we spoke with were positive about the atmosphere in the home and how well the manager and the staff team were doing.

The provider was using a number of different measures to assess and monitor the quality of the service. We spoke with the registered manager who told us there were a number of audits in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. Examples of audits we looked at included; medication, care plans, mealtimes, health and safety, infection control and training. Since the last inspection we were told that a quality assurance visit had been made by an independent auditor. An action plan was in place for the manager following this visit. This was followed up by a quality assurance person who worked for the company.The manager had started to develop the programme of staff supervisions and appraisals.

The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service and to address specific issues. None of the five complaints/concerns recorded since March 2012 had been upheld. Discussion with the manager showed that she saw complaints as a way of improving the service for people. The manager held regular staff and relatives/residents meetings so that people who used the service, their representatives and staff could comment on the home and take action to improve the quality of the service.

The manager told us that she reviewed the health and safety records on a regular basis.

We found there were procedures in place for staff to report accidents and incidents.The manager monitored these and told us they had made a referral to the falls clinic for one person following a number of falls.

We saw the results of an independent survey dated July 2012 that we were told the provider sends out every three months. This was positive in relation to the care and welfare of people who live at Cherrytrees.