You are here

Banstead Road - Care Home Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 4 December 2012
Date of Publication: 16 January 2013
Inspection Report published 16 January 2013 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

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 4 December 2012, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who represent the interests of people who use services, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

Reasons for our judgement

From talking with people and looking at the minutes of house meetings we could see that people were given opportunities to raise any issues they had with staff on a regular basis. We saw that where issues had been identified action had been taken. One person told us that when they first came here, an electrical fitting in their room was not working. They said they told the manager and it was fixed. The house meeting minutes were written in an easy read format. People’s comments were clearly recorded in the minutes. Two people we spoke to said they would tell staff if they were unhappy about anything. This shows us that people were asked for their feedback on how the service was doing, and action was taken where necessary.

Feedback was obtained from people who use the service, their relatives, staff and other relevant agencies by use of questionnaires. These were sent annually. We saw that the results had been reviewed, and a summary and reply was given to people. The manager and provider were monitoring the quality of the service by giving people the opportunity to comment on how well they thought the service was doing.

We saw that there was clear information for people on how to make a complaint. This was displayed in the dining room. This was in an easy read format to make it accessible to people. The provider had provided the manager with access to a computer system where all complaints and safeguarding concerns were logged. We saw that the manager was regularly reporting to the provider. At the time of our visit there had been no complaints or safeguarding issues recorded for some time. The last recorded complaint was in 2010, and we saw that the provider had dealt with it. Complaints and compliments were being monitored by the manager and the provider. Appropriate action had been taken where needed.

We looked at the records of accidents and incidents. There was a system in place to monitor and analyse them if they happened. At the time of our visit there had been no recent accidents recorded. We spoke to staff who confirmed that they were not aware of any recent accidents. All knew the process for reporting and recording accidents and incidents, including near misses.

The manager explained that the service has a number of audits carried out by the provider. Areas checked include, finances, health and safety, and quality of care. The provider also operated a system where registered managers from other services audit each other. They checked different aspects of care at each visit. They also talked with people and staff to ask for their feedback.

We asked the registered manager if they had received any expert advice, or had visits from professionals to assess the quality of the service. We saw that the service had received a positive food hygiene inspection from the local authority. We also saw that health and safety items such as electrical safety, and Legionella checks had been carried out by professionals. The manager told us that they had recently changed pharmacists. The new pharmacist would carry out an audit on medication, the old one did not. This shows that external professionals were consulted for advice and information. .

We could see that the service was being reviewed regularly and action was being taken where needed.