You are here

Archived: Elite Care Providers

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 9, 12, 17, 19 July 2013
Date of Publication: 17 August 2013
Inspection Report published 17 August 2013 PDF

People should be safe from harm from unsafe or unsuitable equipment (outcome 11)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are not at risk of harm from unsafe or unsuitable equipment (medical and non-medical equipment, furnishings or fittings).
  • Benefit from equipment that is comfortable and meets their needs.

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 9 July 2013, 12 July 2013, 17 July 2013 and 19 July 2013, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff, reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services and talked with commissioners of services.

Our judgement

People were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment.

Reasons for our judgement

We saw that the agency had a risk management process in place to assess people’s living conditions. The agency did not provide equipment directly to people using its services. Where staff was using people’s own equipment in or outside of their home, the use of the equipment had been risk assessed. For example using people’s kettles, microwaves or cookers for meal preparation or the use of wheelchairs when supporting people outside of their home. The manager said that they had identified the need to ensure that when assessing people who had their own mobility aids or equipment, care plans needed to record who was responsible for the maintenance of it. The manager also clarified that the agency was purchasing circuit breakers to test electrical appliances in peoples’ homes so that staff could ensure they were safe to use. This was going to be added into the risk management process.

We saw that staff acted in the best interest of people they were supporting. We saw that staff alerted managers about potential and actual risk to people’s health or well being. We saw good examples of how the agency sought consent from people using its services or families to raise risk with the relevant people. For example arranging that medication could be provided in blister packs was agreed with the peoples’ families.