You are here

Archived: Lammas Lodge

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 21 June 2011
Date of Publication: 8 August 2011
Inspection Report published 8 August 2011 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

How this check was done

Our judgement

People had not always had their needs met by a staff team that was suitably trained, working effectively and well supported.

User experience

One person living in the home had not been provided with support from a staff team who were well trained and equipped to meet their very complex needs. As reported earlier this had a negative impact on others living in the home.

Other evidence

Training records showed that staff had been provided with the required basic training and specialist training such as positive behaviour support techniques. A system was in place in the company to prompt the manager to arrange refresher training for staff in some topics when required, such as annual fire safety and moving and handling.

Staff told us that they had found that the staffing levels on many days had meant they could not meet all of the needs of the people in the home. There had been an increase in difficult incidents that they had to respond to and staff were being hurt during many of these incidents. Some female staff had been feeling vulnerable due to the risk of being assaulted and their male colleagues had been feeling a weight of responsibility to protect their female colleagues. This set of circumstances meant staff were working in extremely stressful conditions.

The company’s policy was to provide staff with bi-monthly supervision and staff meetings every six to eight weeks. The office and meeting room had been converted into a flat in 2010, so an additional people could be accommodated at the home. Staff told us that because of this they no longer had a room where they could take breaks or hold supervisions and meetings. They said this had meant during office hours (when the clerk was working in the office) they had nowhere to take a break other than the garden. A team leader said she had to hold supervisions with her team members in the evenings or outside during a cigarette break. Handovers between shifts were described as very limited because the people living in the home were in the same room and could hear what was being said.

Support staff were working twelve hour shifts and team leaders fourteen and a half hour shifts followed by a sleep-in. Sometimes circumstances had meant team leaders had not been able to go home the morning after. These were very long periods to work under difficult conditions and without proper breaks and support systems.

As a result of not being listened to about staffing levels and the lack of effective support, the team morale was very low. This had led to someone contacting us to make us aware that there were problems at the home.