You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Borrage House. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.
All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 16 May 2013
Date of Publication: 8 June 2013
Inspection Report published 08 June 2013 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

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 16 May 2013, 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

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

Reasons for our judgement

The home employs care workers, a care manager, a business manager and activity organiser plus ancillary staff. At the time of our visit there were a number of staff vacancies, and despite new staff having been recruited, they had not started work as pre employment checks were pending. One of the night staff on duty during our visit had not received an appropriate induction and had had one ‘shadowing’ shift during the day, prior to working on shift as a full team member. The provider may wish to note that all new staff should have an appropriate induction and introductory programme prior to working unsupervised.

People spoke highly of the staff and described them as, 'friendly, caring’ and ‘kind.’ People told us that they were happy with the care provided and staff respected their privacy. During our inspection we saw several examples of staff treating people with dignity and respect, by knocking on doors and speaking to people in an appropriate way. One visitor told us, “Staff seem to be good at their jobs and care about the people who live here."

We spoke with people who used the service and they told us that they received care from staff who they knew by name and that they had no concerns with regard to the standard of care provided. Comments included, “The staff here are very good, there are always plenty of them around." Another person told us, “I don’t have to wait for attention. They come and check to see I am alright or need anything.”

We spoke with three members of staff, including the care manager and ‘business’ manager. All of the staff told us how they enjoyed working at the Borrage House, that they worked together as a team and were proud of the level of care provided. Staff told us that residents had a choice about their daily life and were given options about getting up or going to bed, what they ate and where they spent their time. This demonstrated that people were able to make their own choices and were not restricted by rules or strict routines.

We reviewed the staffing rotas for the month prior to our inspection. These showed that consistent staffing levels were maintained. However, the provider may wish to note that there needs to be a clear structure in place as to who was in charge of each shift.

On the day of the visit, a member of staff had contacted the service to report they were not coming to work. The staff on duty told us that this did not have an impact on the shift as they could manage with the remaining staff on duty and that there had been an additional member of staff on duty anyway.

Our observations on the day of the inspection showed that there was a sufficient number of staff on duty during the night and morning to meet the individual needs and dependency levels of people at the service.

We spoke with all of the night staff and some of the day staff on duty. They told us that they thought there were enough staff, and that they could support the needs of people using the service. Staff told us that there were seldom problems covering shifts due to staff absence. No agency staff had been used in the last twelve months.

However, the provider may wish to note that none of the night staff knew who was 'in charge' of the shift and were unsure of the numbers of people in residence. This is of concern because if there was to be an emergency situation, then staff need to know the numbers of people in the home and also who is to take charge of the situation.