You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 15 October 2013
Date of Publication: 11 January 2014
Inspection Report published 11 January 2014 PDF | 77.95 KB

People should be cared for by staff who are properly qualified and able to do their job (outcome 12)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by staff who are fit, appropriately qualified and are physically and mentally able to do their job.

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 15 October 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

People were not cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

Reasons for our judgement

Prior to our visit we received information of concern from the UK Border Agency regarding the provider’s employment procedures. During our visit we looked at the staff recruitment files of all 12 members of care staff employed at the service. We found that appropriate checks were not undertaken before staff began work. This meant that people received support from staff whose conduct and experience was not adequately checked.

The provider had obtained checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) for each staff member.

We found that appropriate checks were not always undertaken before staff began work. We saw that there was some missing or incomplete documentation in the personnel files. One staff file did not contain any information relating to their employment.

Under Schedule 3 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 providers must obtain satisfactory evidence of conduct and the reasons why staff had left previous employment if they had worked with vulnerable adults before. None of the 12 staff files we looked at had any reason recorded why staff had left their previous jobs. It was not possible to ascertain if the staff had previously worked with vulnerable adults or whether the written references related to previous employment as only one file contained a full employment history. This meant that people were at risk of receiving support from staff whose conduct and experience were not adequately checked.