1, 9, 13 August 2013
During an inspection looking at part of the service
At our first visit to the service on 1 August 2013 people we spoke with told us they were happy living at Hazel Bank. They said they enjoyed the meals and activities provided and made many positive comments about the staff employed in the home.
People told us they felt safe living in the home and said they would speak to a member of staff if they had any concerns about the support or services provided.
People told us,
'The staff are very nice, you only need to ask if you want anything',
'We get plenty to eat',
and said, 'We're looked after well'.
We saw that care staff treated people with respect and gave them choices about the support they received. We saw many positive interactions between the staff on duty and people who used this service. These positive interactions supported individuals' wellbeing.
We found that, although some improvements had been made since our previous inspection in February 2013, the service was still not meeting a number of essential standards. Further improvements were required including in care planning, safe handling of medication, protecting people from the risk of infection, staff training and in how the quality and safety of the service was monitored.
On 8 August 2013 the community nursing team, which supported people who lived at Hazel Bank, told us that a person had been admitted to the home inappropriately. They told us that the services and facilities at Hazel Bank were not suitable to meet the person's needs and arrangements had been made for them to move to another service. The community nurses told us that other people who lived in the home had not received the support they needed because the staff at Hazel Bank had been busy trying to support this individual.
This was passed to the local authority that was responsible for safeguarding vulnerable adults. Social workers visited the home on 8 August 2013 to ensure the safety of the people who lived there. The social workers found that the acting manager had left the service before the end of their shift and there were only two staff to support the people in the home.
In response to these concerns, we carried out a second visit to Hazel Bank on 9 August 2013 to check that the people still in the home were safe and that there were sufficient staff to care for people. We found that one person had been admitted to the home on 7 August 2013 but had then moved to another service as the care and facilities at Hazel Bank were not suitable to meet their needs. We also found that other people in the home had not received the care they needed because the care staff were engaged in supporting this individual. We found this had placed people at risk.
The registered provider for the home told us that the acting manager had left the home before the end of their shift on 8 August 2012 and would not be returning to the home in the foreseeable future. They said another member of staff was also absent and would not be returning to the service in the near future.
Following our visit on 9 August 2013 the registered provider sent us information showing how they had ensured there would be sufficient staff to meet the needs of the people in the home. We carried out a brief visit to the service on 13 August 2013 to check that there were sufficient staff to support people who lived in the home. At this visit we found that the actual staffing levels matched the staffing rosters that we were given by the provider.