You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 August 2011
Date of Publication: 12 October 2011
Inspection Report published 12 October 2011 PDF

People should be cared for in safe and accessible surroundings that support their health and welfare (outcome 10)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are in safe, accessible surroundings that promote their wellbeing.

How this check was done

Our judgement

Although the buildings were broadly safe and accessible, they did not sufficiently promote the well being of people living in the home. Standards of décor in the communal areas were plain and they were in need of redecoration. Plans for full redecoration were provided but have yet to be completed.

Overall we found that Dysons Wood House was meeting this essential standard but, to maintain this, we suggested that some improvements were made.

User experience

One person living in the home told us about the plans for refurbishing the buildings. He had been involved in discussions with staff about the proposed plans.

Other evidence

At the time of our visit the main house accommodated five people, with a further seven living in the newer building. Each building provided individual bedrooms. The bedroom we saw was personalised. The communal environment, particularly in the main house did not feel welcoming. There were no curtains at the large windows in the lounge and dining room. In the entrance hallway there was an orientation board indicating the day, date and weather. It was up to date and the staff told us that people living in the home help to update this board daily. One of the communal toilets in the newer building was soiled. The senior staff told us that care staff were responsible for cleaning as well as care, but there were plans to provide housekeeping and domestic support to enable the to focus on delivering care.

We were told about the plans to redecorate the newer building. The old building was also due to be redecorated and have other improvements, despite the long term plan for its demolition and replacement with two new bungalows. Plans were being developed for the people living there to provide for them during the building works. There were various notices around the buildings to help people understand the plans and informing them who they could discuss any issues with. Some were in accessible symbol formats. Some of the people living in the home were clearly aware of the changes and one was able to tell us about them in some detail. We saw senior staff explaining some of the changes to another person using appropriate communication.

During the morning and the lunch period we saw the lounge door wedged open by means of a chair. We were told that the approved door retainer was not working. We noted that the maintenance person spent some time attempting to repair it.