You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 November 2011
Date of Publication: 14 December 2011
Inspection Report published 14 December 2011 PDF

There should be enough members of staff to keep people safe and meet their health and welfare needs (outcome 13)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by sufficient numbers of appropriate staff.

How this check was done

Our judgement

People benefit from staff who are deployed in sufficient numbers to meet their needs. Staffing levels are being kept under review to ensure that they reflect people’s dependency levels.

Overall, we found that Brendoncare Froxfield was meeting this essential.

User experience

People appreciated the support they received from individual staff. Staff were described as being “caring” and “very patient”. We saw staff going about their work in a friendly and positive manner. Staff were observed carrying out a range of tasks, such as helping people with drinks, assisting with meals, talking to people and giving encouragement with activities. One of the staff told us “we work hard as a staff team for the same aim”.

People had call alarms in their rooms which they could use to contact one of the care staff. They told us that staff were available when needed. Staff members said there were enough staff working throughout the day to keep people safe and to meet their needs. This included occasions when people needed the support of two care staff with their personal care tasks. We were told that relief and agency staff were deployed when needed to ensure that staffing was maintained at a consistent level.

Staffing levels were being kept under review to ensure that they were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Staff told us that staffing had increased on occasions when people at the home had a higher level of dependency and needed more support. One of the senior staff said that staffing levels were assessed on a weekly basis and a decision made about the need for additional care hours.

The care staff were allocated to work in a particular area of the home at the start of their shifts. This enabled them to work as a team to support a number of people who used the service. Staff said that they also had the opportunity to work in different areas of the home, which they thought was useful as it enabled them to get to know all the people who used the service.

Staff training was being given a high priority, so that people were supported by competent staff. One staff member commented that they had “never known a place like this for training”.

Other evidence

In addition to the home’s manager, there was a staff team which comprised team leaders, nurses and care workers. The rota for care staff at the time of our visit included two nurses and seven care workers. A care leader was in charge of the home as the manager was not working at the time. We were told that there could be eight care workers on duty during the day, depending on occupancy and dependency levels. Other staff were deployed to cover catering, maintenance and domestic work, and to support people with activities. The staffing levels reduced at night to reflect the change in workload.

Handover meetings took place during the day so that the staff who came on duty were up to date with the day’s events and aware of people’s needs.