You are here

Archived: Marsh House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 13 June 2013
Date of Publication: 17 July 2013
Inspection Report published 17 July 2013 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We carried out a visit on 13 June 2013, observed how people were being cared for, 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 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and was provided in line with plan of care.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke to some of the people who lived in Marsh House and invited them to share their experience of the care and support they received. One person said, “It is very good here and the staff are lovely. I have no regrets about moving in”. Another said,” I have a lovely room and you can have a look at it if you want to”. Someone else said, “I don’t sleep well and the girls often bring me a cup of tea which I enjoy”.

We looked at the care record files for four people living at the home and these records included the personalised plan of care. The records were arranged in a systematic way with an index of contents. This made it easy to locate specific documents. The records were individualised and included a pre-admission assessment, the person's life history and their likes/dislikes. We observed that health assessments, risk assessments, nutritional assessments and daily records were in place. Care plans were detailed and provided staff with clear guidance about how to support the person. We could see that assessments and care plans were reviewed each month.

Every care plan contained a detailed dietary assessment which showed regular weights recorded. Reviews showed that, if a person was losing weight and in danger of becoming malnourished, staff were given written instructions about fortified diets and high calorie meals. There was also evidence that the dietician or speech and language therapist were consulted if necessary.

Health care needs were met by close working relationships with the people’s own doctor or the district nursing service. We were able to speak to a visiting nurse and she confirmed that the district nursing team had recently started a weekly clinic at the home for people to discuss their health needs. This was proving very successful. They also told us that they were happy with the care and support provided by the staff at Marsh House.

Detailed records were maintained of consultations with, or visits from, health and social care professionals. In addition, a record was maintained of visits from, and communication with, people's relatives.

From our observations during the inspection, we noted that people living at the home were well cared for. Staff were regularly checking people to see if they needed support, including people who chose to remain in their rooms.

The home did not have a designated activities coordinator but two members of the care staff team had delegated responsibility for providing activities and outings. During our visit 10 people and two staff went for a trip on the ‘Dial-a Ride’ bus and we were told this was a twice-weekly event.

From our discussions with people living at the home, relatives and staff, we heard there were plenty of varied activities held on a regular basis and the planned weekly activities were displayed in the foyer.

We saw that the manager audited care plans on a regular basis for quality assurance purposes, to check whether peoples' needs had changed and ensured these continued to be met. We saw evidence to show that concerns identified were acted upon, for example, increased frequency of observations.