You are here

Priscilla Wakefield House Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 June 2014
Date of Publication: 15 October 2014
Inspection Report published 15 October 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 27 June 2014

During a routine inspection

The inspection team who carried out this inspection consisted of two adult social care inspectors and two specialist advisors a nurse and an occupational therapist. During the inspection, the team worked together to answer five key questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

As part of this inspection we spoke with 11 people who use the service, six relatives, the registered manager, seven staff, this included qualified staff. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the home which included, 10 care plans and daily care records.

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?

We could not be confident that systems were in place to monitor the cleanliness of the home. We saw that the service had ensured that risk assessments were in place, however, most staff were not aware of deprivation of liberty safeguards and how this impacted on the people they cared for.

Is the service effective?

We saw that people had access to other healthcare professionals when they needed. Staff had completed training in a number of areas to increase their knowledge and skills.

Is the service caring?

People we spoke with told us that staff respected their privacy and dignity. However, we were told by people and relatives that staff did not always meet their needs.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that people were referred to other healthcare professionals, such as, physiotherapist and dietician, however, of the care plans that we reviewed these were not person centred.

Is the service well-led?

Staff we spoke with showed that they understood the needs of individual people they cared for. Systems were in place to monitoring the quality of the service, however, these were not always effective and the provider could not be sure that people were protected from the risk of unsafe or inappropriate care.