You are here

Archived: RNIB Wavertree House

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 19, 27 February 2014
Date of Publication: 27 March 2014
Inspection Report published 27 March 2014 PDF

There should be enough members of staff to keep people safe and meet their health and welfare needs (outcome 13)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by sufficient numbers of appropriate staff.

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 19 February 2014 and 27 February 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Staffing levels are satisfactory to meet the needs of the people who live in the home.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service benefitted from sufficient staff to meet their needs.

The assistant manager told us, shifts are broken up into, early, late and night. On the early shift we have four carers and one supervisor. During the late we have three care workers and one supervisor. On nights, we have a sleeping care worker and two working carers. A member of management is also on call for support. We were informed that the level of staffing was determined by the care needs of the people using the service. The assistant manager told us, “If we have people with higher care needs, more care staff will be required. It’s about us identifying the care needs of people and also how care needs fluctuate.” We were told that the service recently had two people join the service who required additional support. The assistant manager identified that additional care staff was required to meet the needs of people using the service and therefore an additional staff member was implemented for the early shift. This demonstrated that the service had a process in place which ensured staffing levels were flexible to meet the needs of people using the service.

We examined the staff rota for the following two weeks. We found that the service employed eight full time members of staff; these included part time workers, a relief worker, supervisors and night workers. We saw that the rota clearly documented how many workers, their hours and role. The service informed us that the rota was used as a working tool on calculating what shifts were covered and where additional hours needed to be covered. The assistant manager told us that when agency staff were required, the service worked closely with a local agency as many of the care workers had worked at the service previously. This demonstrated that the service had enough staff and people who used the service could expect a consistency of care.

The assistant manager also told us that there were systems in place to cover sickness, whereby additional staff would be utilised. We saw that there was a structured system in place for dealing with staff annual leave requests, and that the staffing rotas were planned in advance. We were informed by the assistant manager that the service would approach staff first to cover any absences and then agency staff would be contacted. This demonstrated that the service could respond to expected and unexpected changes in the service, for example to cover sickness, planned absences and emergencies.

The provider may find it useful to note that we spoke with four care workers who all confirmed the shifts were manageable with the staffing levels but that shifts did feel pushed. One care worker told us, “The morning routine can be extremely busy and we lack the time to just sit with people.” Another care worker told us, “We work well as a team but I do feel rushed at times.”

People we spoke with spoke highly of the care staff. One person told us, “They are excellent.” Another person told us, “I can’t complain.” People we spoke with confirmed that their call bells were responded to promptly. On the day of the inspection, we found that the environment was calm and relaxed. Staff presence was felt and we noted staff sitting talking to people.

The provider may wish to note that people we spoke to expressed their wish to access the local community. For example one person told us that they use to enjoy going for walks. We were informed that they felt unable to do this as a staff member would not be able to go out with them due to staffing levels. We found that people spoke of their wish to access the community but staffing levels did not allow for a staff member to support them.