You are here

Archived: Partridge Care Centre Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 August 2012
Date of Publication: 21 September 2012
Inspection Report published 21 September 2012 PDF | 76.02 KB

People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 08/08/2012, observed how people were being cared for, talked to staff and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

The provider was meeting this standard. People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

User experience

A relative told us that they feel safe that there relative is being cared for at the service. They explained, "It takes away that worry at night that [they] are going to have a fall. [My relative] is being looked after by the carers in a professional way."

When we asked a person who used the service if they felt safe, they replied, "Yes. I feel as though I'm being looked after. I lived on my own and I didn't like it much."

Another person said, “I feel the staff are very patient. No one is ever rude. They are friendly and so I feel safe here, very safe, and not everyone ends up as lucky as that.”

Other evidence

Records showed that there had been a high number of safeguarding referrals made to the local authority safeguarding team in the months prior to our inspection. A high proportion of these related to falls and unobserved injuries. We found that there had been a change to reporting procedures at the service which meant that more incidents were being raised as safeguarding concerns. This showed that the provider responded appropriately to the possibility of abuse.

We saw that the provider had undertaken an analysis of the safeguarding incidents that had been raised at the service. This looked at possible reasons for the rise in safeguarding referrals and gave actions for the provider to look into. To date, there was no information available as to whether this action had been completed or followed up. This analysis showed that the provider has systems in place to prevent abuse before it occurred.

Training records showed that only a minority of staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults. These showed that out of 90 staff, only 35 had received this training. The provider may wish to note that, in order to ensure that staff understand the aspects of the safeguarding process that is relevant to them, this training should be attended by all relevant staff at the service.

Despite the inconsistent training in safeguarding vulnerable adults, staff that we spoke with understood what the different types of abuse were. They were aware of what they would do if they witnessed an incident of abuse, demonstrating that staff understood the signs of abuse and would raise this with the right person if those signs were noticed.

On the whole, staff knew where to find the safeguarding policies and procedures although one member of staff on induction was unsure of this.