You are here

The Georgians (Boston) Limited - 50 Wide Bargate Boston Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at The Georgians (Boston) Limited - 50 Wide Bargate Boston. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.
All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 June 2014
Date of Publication: 4 July 2014
Inspection Report published 04 July 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 5 June 2014

During a routine inspection

When we visited The Georgians there were 38 people living at the home, we spoke with four relatives who visited the home during our inspection and two people who lived at the home, staff and the matron. We also spent time in the communal areas to observe care.

The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Systems were in place to make sure that the matron and staff learnt from events such as accidents, incidents and complaints. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

The home had proper policies and procedure in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The MCA states that every adult has the right to make his or her own decisions and must be assumed to have capacity to make them unless it is proved otherwise. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards are part of the MCA. They aim to make sure that people in care homes and hospitals are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom.

Recruitment practices was safe and thorough. No staff had been subject to disciplinary action. The matron set the staff rotas, they took people�s needs into account when making decisions about the numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required. This helped to ensure people�s needs were met.

Is the service effective?

Where people did not have the ability to make a decision for themselves a best interest meeting was arranged. We saw the matron had arranged an independent advocate to represent a person who was unable to make a decision. This ensured the person's interests were fairly represented.

People�s health and care needs were assessed with them. Specialist dietary, mobility and skin care needs had been identified in the care plans when required. People told us they had been involved in writing their care plans and they reflected their current needs.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by attentive staff who were able to accurately describe people�s care needs. One relative told us, �We get on ok. We are happy with the care. XXX is well looked after, I wouldn�t keep her here if she wasn�t.� A person living at the home said, �On the whole I�m pretty well satisfied.�

Is the service responsive?

We saw the matron and staff worked collaboratively with other health and care professionals to ensure people received safe joined up care. We spoke with one person who told us that they had been to the hospital to see the eye doctor and then been to the opticians. Matron had arranged for the sensory impairment team to visit the person and assess their care needs around their eye sight and to put a care plan in place.

People told us that they Knew how to make a complaint. We saw the complaints log and saw the matron responded to complaints appropriately.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance system in place; records showed that identified shortfalls were promptly addressed. As a result the quality of service was continually improving.