You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 September 2012
Date of Publication: 1 October 2012
Inspection Report published 1 October 2012 PDF

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

Our judgement

The provider was meeting this standard. The provider had an effective system in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service people receive.

User experience

We asked people using the service for their views about the quality of service and care they received. People told us they were happy with the care arrangements and said staff regularly asked them about any extra help that they may need. One person said “I’ve only been here a short while and I’m very happy with the service.”

People told us they had the opportunity to comment about the service in the monthly residents’ meeting and at the care review meetings. People said they recently completed a survey about the home. They were asked for their views about a range of aspects within the service such as the staff, meals and activities.

People were aware of how to raise concerns or make a compliant about the service. The complaints procedure was included in the service user guide and displayed at the service.

Other evidence

We looked at the records of four people using the service. We found care plans and risk assessments were updated and reviewed monthly or sooner if people’s needs changed. Arrangements were in place to safely manage risk or deal with any foreseeable emergencies. Records showed health and social care professionals were involved in the reviewing and planning of people’s care and support. Staff we spoke with said they were involved in the reviewing of people’s needs.

There were regular residents meetings. We read the minutes of the last residents meeting which took place on June 2012, which showed the topics discussed and actions agreed. The minutes showed people had the opportunity to make other comments or to raise issues.

The registered manager told us annual quality assurance surveys were sent out in August 2012 and they were collating the responses. The results would be analysed and shared with the people using the service. The registered manager was responsible for addressing any issues identified from the survey and improve the quality of service people received.

Staff told us they received regular support through staff meetings, annual appraisals and regularly supervision, where they discussed their work and any training needs. Staff told us they felt supported and were confident to approach the registered manager if they had any concerns. A training and development plan was in place and staff received the appropriate training and continuous professional development to look after the people using the service.

The service had quality assurance systems in place, which monitored the effectiveness of the service. Records showed regular audits were carried out on the maintenance of the premises and the equipment, care records, accident and incidents, health and safety areas and medication audits. There was an annual servicing and maintenance contract in place that ensured equipment and safety checks were carried out. Records showed fire drills and safety checks were carried out at regular intervals internally and by qualified professionals.

The provider carried out monthly quality assurance and monitoring assessments of the service. We read the audit for June 2012 and found checks were carried out on the premises, practices, observations, complaints and audits on care files and staff training. Any action points from the previous audit were checked for completion. The report concluded with summary of findings and identified actions for the registered manager address. The provider might find it useful to note that there were no audits carried out in the month of July 2012 and August 2012.