You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 May 2014
Date of Publication: 10 June 2014
Inspection Report published 10 June 2014 PDF

Overview

Inspection carried out on 14 May 2014

During a routine inspection

Summary

We carried out this inspection to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity and we observed caring and compassionate care by the staff. People told us they felt safe. People had their own care file and these contained an assessment of needs for example; mobility, eating and drinking, mental health, skin care, social activity, monitoring charts and contact with other professionals. This contained information about the way each person should be supported and cared for. Additional information included risk assessments to ensure people remained safe from harm.

We looked at safeguarding referral records that were recorded to ensure people who used the service were kept safe from harm. We found the records accurate and complete and when required, a notification was sent to us at the Care Quality Commission (CQC). This meant that people were protected from the risk of harm.

A visiting relative told us, �My relative was admitted here urgently and then went home after a while but she wanted to come back here. I have never overheard or seen anything negative from the staff, they are all so friendly.�

We looked at medicine administration records (MAR) documentation and found these to be accurate, precise and transcribed in a clear and consistent manner. People�s MAR documentation also included a photo of the person to reduce the risk of inaccuracies.

Is the service effective?

We observed a number of care and support activities that staff undertook. We saw that staff appeared calm, very supportive and compassionate with people�s needs. Staff were able to describe people�s needs and how these should be best met. We saw that daily notes detailed what care the person received.

We spoke with people who used the service. Comments included, �Staff know what they are doing and they ask you how you are and if you are happy. I do feel safe here�, �It�s nice here. The staff are very kind and I have a nice room� and �I decide whether I want to get up, it�s up to me.�

Is the service caring?

Staff we spoke with were clear and precise about their role. One staff member we spoke with told us, �We review peoples care plans with them regularly and discuss their �day to day� lives with them. We have a six weekly review too which goes into much more detail.� Records we looked at corroborated this.

We spoke with a visiting health care professional and they told us, �I visit quite often and the service always appears well organised and they know we are coming. Paperwork is always well prepared and they are very on the ball. Staff are very caring and they are accommodating and have helped with urgent admissions in the past when needed.�

Is the service responsive?

We observed a game of cards being played by five people and they appeared to have enjoyed the session. We observed some people who used the service choosing their favourite book from the mobile library that attended the service. We also observed the lunchtime session which was well organised and staff were clear about their roles in supporting people that needed it.

We spoke with visiting relatives of people that used the service and they told us, �The care is very good here and the owners are often available to answer any questions we have�, �My relative always looks well and staff deal with accidents promptly and respectfully� and �Staff handle people�s good and bad moods very well, without being patronising.�

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. We looked at how these complaints had been dealt with, and found that the response had been open, thorough, and timely. People were therefore assured that complaints were investigated and action was taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The service had an effective quality assurance system in place and records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.

We saw records that showed the service had completed a �residents and relatives� survey in July 2013 and another survey had been completed in January 2014.

We saw responses from people who used the service, their relatives and other professionals. We saw that survey responses were received from 29 people who used the service, 14 relatives and nine professionals. An analysis of results was completed and a �survey action plan� was completed to ensure any concerns raised was captured and acted on.

We saw records of regular meetings had taken place for different staff groups for example; care day staff, care night staff, seniors, domestic and laundry staff. Records we looked at confirmed meetings were well attended and discussed topics for example; personal care, equality and diversity, care plans, keyworker notes, teamwork, and cleanliness.