Archived: Jack Howarth House

We conducted this visit because safeguarding concerns were raised by the service, and to follow up on one area of non-compliance raised at the last inspection in March 2013. Concerns had been raised by staff with senior managers at Scope that people were not treated with dignity and respect. The provider had taken immediate action in response to these concerns, including suspending some staff and appointing an interim manager. The provider worked closely with the local safeguarding team and action was being taken to prevent suspended staff from working in other care settings whilst investigations were on-going.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had systems in place which meant they had responded immediately to safeguarding concerns. Immediate actions taken ensured that people were safe and their needs were met by skilled and experienced staff.

We found that people were treated with dignity and respect. We saw that care workers treated people with genuine care. People's physical care needs were met. People were not always meaningfully engaged in social activities. Care records were not always accurate.

The provider had taken action to improve the quality of the service. However, the provider did not have appropriate systems to seek the views of people or their relatives.

Two people who used the service indicated that they were happy with their rooms. One person said that staff listened to them and enabled them to make decisions about their care. Two members of staff did not engage with people using the service when assisting them to do things.

People living at the service had comprehensive care plans, which evidenced people's preferences and how they liked their care needs to be met. Documentation had not been completed for a person using the service for respite care. Staff sought the input of other professionals to ensure that people's care needs were met.

Staff had attended training and were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults. The manager had implemented the safeguarding policy appropriately and supported people involved.

Staff described a 'really friendly atmosphere' and said that 'it's like a family situation.' The manager supported the training and development of staff, and staff described the training as 'good.' A comprehensive system of supervision and appraisals was in place.

Reviews of the service were undertaken each month by managers of other homes. The views of people using the service, their families, staff and GPs were sought on an annual basis. There was an action plan for the service, which was reviewed each month by the managers line manager and underpinned service development.