You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 September 2014
Date of Publication: 20 November 2014
Inspection Report published 20 November 2014 PDF

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

Not met 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 18 September 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was not planned and not delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

During our inspection we spoke with seven people who lived in the home and two of their relatives. All of them spoke very highly about the staff and the care that they received. Significant concerns were raised about the staff shortages which we have reported in the 'Staffing' section of this report. People told us that the staff worked very hard to meet their needs. Comments we received included; "I have really good relationships with the staff but they work too hard and never get a minute to chat" and "The staff are very busy and very kind. They do so much for us and they are run ragged and it's not fair on them."

Throughout the day of our inspection we observed staff interacting with people who lived in the home. We saw warm, positive interactions. It was obvious that the staff had very close relationships with the people that they were caring for. We saw that people were treated with dignity and respect and were also having a laugh and a joke with the staff. One person who lived in the home said to us "I love it here. I've acquired a selection of daughters."

We asked about activities and were told that this was also the responsibility of the care staff. Staff told us that they did activities when they could but these were limited due to time constraints. We saw that there was a daily programme of activities but this mainly consisted of hairdressing and the 'Daily Sparkle' which was a newspaper that was handed out for people to read. We did not see any activities taking place during our inspection. We saw that the staff barely had any time to talk to people as they were trying to make sure that everyone's basic care needs were met.

We looked at four care plans for people who lived in the home and we had significant concerns about all of them. They did not reflect the current needs of the people they related to. We have explored this in more detail in the 'Records' section of this report.

We saw that the home had applied for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisation to ensure that they could safely meet the needs of a person who lived in the home. This application had been granted and we saw that a risk assessment had been written with regards to the risks. However this risk assessment was not being followed and the person's behaviour presented a significant risk to the care and welfare of some of the people who lived in the home. We have explored this in more detail in the 'Safeguarding' section of this report.

We have reported our findings from this inspection to the local authority safeguarding unit and have asked them to investigate our concerns.