You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 19 February 2014
Date of Publication: 29 March 2014
Inspection Report published 29 March 2014 PDF | 79.26 KB

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 19 February 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We reviewed the care plans for two people and saw a wide variety of assessments were used which gave guidance for staff about caring for people. The assessments included; communication, mobility, continence, physical health, behaviour support, medication, finances and daily and night time routines. Each plan was written in the first person and contained individualised information about what people liked and disliked and included techniques which reduced anxiety and maintained safety in a variety of contexts. Each assessment included a risk scoring system that prompted staff to think about if an activity could be potentially harmful and clear guidance was given with strategies which reduced harm. For example; one person was registered blind and therefore strategies which ensured safety within a variety of activities were implemented.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people’s safety and welfare. During our visit one person was scheduled to have a best interest meeting for a dental procedure, we spoke with the deputy manager who told us that the people they cared for were unable to verbalise their wishes and so best interest meetings were held for any treatments required to ensure the person's welfare was maintained. We spoke with a family member for this person and they told us they felt the staff kept their relative safe and cared for their welfare "very well".

We spoke with two staff who told us they read the care plans frequently which meant they were aware of any changes with people's care and they told us they knew people well and learnt to interpret their body language and verbal sounds so they knew what people wanted. They told us that giving choice to people could be "hard" as they had limited communication, they gave us an example of a person who would on occasion refuse food and they said they would wait for a period of time and offer the food again and if they refused they would offer alternatives. They told us they felt that sometimes people did not want to eat at the same time every day so they tried to be flexible with meal times which ensured people were eating adequate amounts.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. We reviewed the care plans for two people and saw that each person had a hospital passport which meant that hospital staff would be able to care for people if required. We spoke with two staff who told us they were trained with first aid and they were able to tell us what they would do in an emergency. We spoke with two staff who told us they performed regular fire drills and each person had their own individualised evacuation procedure, we reviewed the fire evacuation plans for two people and the provider might like to note the review dates for these documents were stated as October 2012, we did not see any updated plans.