You are here

Archived: Harpers Villas Care Centre

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 31 October 2012
Date of Publication: 28 November 2012
Inspection Report published 28 November 2012 PDF | 99.02 KB

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 looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 31 October 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 use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at the care files of two people who lived at this home. We saw that an assessment of people’s needs was completed before a decision was made to move in to the home. We saw that the initial assessment was reviewed regularly after admission. This would help staff to monitor changes in people’s health and wellbeing.

Pre-admission information was recorded regarding people’s needs and preferences, likes and dislikes and people were asked if they had any needs regarding sexual orientation race or gender identity. This meant that the home had the information needed to provide a service that met the equality and diversity needs of people who used it.

We saw that care files contained detailed support plans based upon people’s needs and abilities. One of the care files seen had not been reviewed or updated by staff for at least three months. The other file had been reviewed and “no change” recorded. There had been no changes made to the care plans even though this person’s needs had changed and they were now being cared for in bed. For example, the diet and fluids care plan recorded that the person ate all of their meals in the lounge and the personal care plan recorded that the person had a daily bath, neither of which occurred as the person did not get out of bed. This meant that the information recorded was not up to date and could result in an omission of care. We spoke with three members of staff and asked them about the specific wants and needs of the people under their care. All three staff were knowledgeable about people’s personal routines and preferences and were aware of the care that they had to provide for them.

We saw that care files recorded a biography of the person who lived at the home and “this is my life” information. Details included historical information about family life, favourite things, animals and other important facts. This information helped staff provide care suited to people's individual preferences and to be able to reminisce with them about their life.

Care files contained individual risk assessments, these identified when people were at risk of sore skin, poor nutrition or falls, and how they should be moved and handled. Risk assessments and agreement for the use of bed rails was also available as needed.

We saw that care files recorded people’s personal preferences regarding times for getting up and going to bed. They also recorded food likes and dislikes and details of any preferred daily routine. This was being further updated by the manager who was amending care plans to make them more “person centred”.

Evidence was available to demonstrate that external professionals such as GP, optician, dentist and district nurses were involved as necessary to maintain people’s health and wellbeing.

We spent the majority of the morning and part of the afternoon in the lounge observing care practices. At the start of our visit we saw a member of staff completing armchair exercises with a large ball with some people. Later in the morning music was played. For the majority of the morning people were not engaged in any social or leisure activities. The manager gave out magazines in the afternoon and some people whose chairs were facing the television would have been able to watch a film. We were told that care staff were responsible for completing activities with people. The manager said that an activity programme was in place which included films, magazines, chatting, armchair exercises. We were told that external entertainers visited once per fortnight to undertake armchair exercises and once per month someone came in to sing to people. Care files seen recorded a limited amount of activities undertaken. The manager told us that she had contacted the Alzheimer’s disease society and was putting together a new activity programme to include quizzes and reminiscence and other activities more suited to the needs of people with dementia.

We saw that people were given a mid morning drink