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

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 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

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

Whilst at Harpers Villas we spoke with a practice nurse and three people who were visiting relatives. The practice nurse had not visited Harpers Villas before but said that from her visit that day there were no problems and staff were helpful. We were introduced to people that lived at the home but did not have detailed conversations with them due to their dementia care needs. The visitors that we spoke with said that they had no issues with the care their loved ones received.

We saw that there was a complaints system in place. We looked at the complaints log book and saw that no complaints had been recorded recently. We noted in one of the care files that we reviewed that a relative had raised an issue at a review meeting but this had not been recorded as a complaint. The manager said that only formal complaints were recorded in the complaint log book and “niggles” would be dealt with immediately but not recorded. The manager agreed that there had been no follow up recorded on the review meeting notes and it was therefore difficult to evidence that action had been taken. The manager agreed to develop a system for recording “niggles” and the action taken to address them. We asked visitors if they knew how to make a complaint. One person we spoke with said, “I have no complaints but I would speak to the manager if I had any worries. Management are approachable and they do all they can under the circumstances.” Another person told us, “I have no worries at all.”

We asked the manager about the quality assurance systems in place at the home. We were told that surveys were left on the reception desk three or four times per year. Family, doctors, the pharmacist, the hairdresser and other visiting professionals were asked to complete a survey. The results were analysed, forwarded to the management team and included in the monthly newsletter which was left on the reception area for people to read if they wished.

We were told that a survey relating to the meals at the home had been given out to people but none had been returned to date.

The manager told us that relatives meetings were arranged approximately every three months but that there were very few people who attended. We asked to see the minutes of the last meeting held and saw that the date had been arranged but nobody had attended. The manager said that she had an “open door” policy which meant that whenever she was on duty people could call in to the office to chat to her and raise any issues or concerns.

We found documented evidence that regular audits of the service had taken place. This included the auditing of medication, accidents and residents funds. We saw that the home had been awarded five stars for their food hygiene by the environmental health department in June 2012 and had received a green award for infection control from Walsall infection control department. This meant that the home had been assessed by external professionals as meeting standards regarding infection control and food hygiene.

At the last inspection of the home the temperature in some bedrooms, the conservatory and corridors appeared cool. The manager told us that this issue was addressed immediately after the inspection. The temperature of bedrooms and communal areas was satisfactory on the day of this inspection.