Archived: Castleman House

We found that some people and their relatives were not listened to when they made a complaint. We found the home did not follow its own complaints policy when people made complaints.

Some people who lived at the home had been assessed as not having capacity to make choices and decisions which affected their lives. We found staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to capacity and best interest decisions.

We found staff had completed safeguarding training and the home had an up to date safeguarding adults policy and processes that were accessible to staff.

We saw evidence that people had been involved in developing their own care and support plans.

People told us they 'were very comfortable and very happy' 'looked after very well', one relative told us their relative is 'washed, dressed, and kept tidy and clean'. We spoke with people who confirmed this.

We observed that people were communicated with by staff who treated them with respect and people were supported to make choices during meal times and daily activities.

We found that staff had key training in most aspects of their roles.

We found the manager did not have systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of services.

Staff supported people as they wished and ensured each person was at the centre of their care. People told us that they were happy and felt included in their care plans. We saw surveys in people's care records that recorded this information.

During our visit, we saw that staff interacted well with people. We saw that staff received good training and were knowledgeable about people's needs and preferences. We saw that staff were respectful and maintained people's dignity, privacy and independence. For example staff knocked on people's doors before entering and asked people how they wished to be supported.

We saw care records that provided clear direction for staff. These had been developed for each individual and described their wishes and preferences in relation to how their care was provided. Relatives were involved in writing plans where the person wished it or where the person was unable to do it themselves.

Equality and diversity had been considered in the service by looking at people's needs on an individual basis. Staff interactions were informative, courteous and respectful.