You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 13 December 2012
Date of Publication: 19 January 2013
Inspection Report published 19 January 2013 PDF

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 reviewed all the information we have gathered about Crossways, looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 13 December 2012 and observed how people were being cared for. We checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care, talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

Two people we spoke with said that they were cared for very well by the staff. One person said, "I never go any more than 2 hours without staff checking on me and offering choices of drinks and snacks. They always make sure my drinks jug is full and there is always plenty of fresh fruit available." Another person told us, "I like it here very much, the food is always very good and the staff are always very kind."

We looked at the care records for two people living in the home and, in both sets of records, we saw that information gathered during the pre-admission process had been used to form the basis of people's individual plans of care. The care plans we looked at were detailed and included information in respect of people's likes, dislikes, needs and wishes. We noted that this information was regularly reviewed and updated when necessary.

We saw records that showed when people had received assistance with personal care such as bathing, body washing and showering. This information also included details in respect of the level of assistance people required. For example, one person's records stated that they needed assistance to get in and out of the bath by using a hoist and that two staff were required.

This told us that people’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans.

We also saw information in respect of risk assessments and plans of care for areas such as skin care, nutrition, weight and mobility, which meant that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

For example, in one person's care records it was noted that risks had been identified in respect of falls. We saw that possible triggers included walking too fast, legs giving way and walking unsupervised. The measures in place to minimise the risks included staff to escort the person to the toilet, ensure the person used their walking frame when mobilising independently and to encourage regular small exercises, to help prevent muscle wastage.

We saw that Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) assessments had been completed for people and that these were reviewed regularly. We also saw that people's weights were checked on a regular basis and any highlighted issues were addressed and advice sought, where necessary, from relevant health professionals.

From the care records we looked at, we saw that people had regular access to and received input from other health professionals such as the doctor, district nurse, continence nurse, chiropodist and speech and language therapist.

This told us that people’s care and treatment reflected relevant research and guidance.