You are here

Archived: Amber House

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 15 January 2014
Date of Publication: 26 February 2014
Inspection Report published 26 February 2014 PDF | 82.45 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 15 January 2014

During a themed inspection looking at Dementia Services

We visited Amber House, one inspector and one 'expert by experience' supported the inspection. At the time of our inspection twelve people lived at Amber House, of which nine had some form of dementia.

We found staff had gathered detailed information about each person they cared for before, and shortly after, admission to the home. This information was used to develop personalised care plans. We found care plans were based around people's preferences and how they wanted their care to be delivered.

People were involved in making decisions about their care. One person said, “The care I get here is very good and the food is better than I had at home. I just tell the staff if I need anything and they get it for me.” Family members said: “I visit her every day and I am very happy that we placed her in here. It is a small home and the staff are very good. I would not want to move her anywhere else”, and, “As a family we are more than happy that our (relative) is in here. You could not get nicer staff. We have no complaints.”

We observed that staff interacted positively with people and encouraged them to be as independent as possible. People said: “I like to look after myself. The staff are there if I need them”; “I like it here, actually. The staff are all right. They helped me to celebrate my birthday last week”; and, “I like it here. I have no complaints.”

We found people had access to health professionals and specialists when they needed them. This included GPs, district nurses, chiropodist, occupational therapists, dentists and opticians.

The home was provided with detailed information when people were admitted from hospital. which included details of any care that had been commissioned following a person's discharge.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people received good quality care. This included audits of care records and observations of care practice.

The provider undertook assessments to ensure people were protected from risk or harm. We found staff had completed specific training in relation to caring for people with dementia and further training had been planned.

People told us they were happy with the care they received and nobody we spoke with raised any concerns with us. Family members told us they knew about the home's complaint procedure. One family member said, “The manager is very approachable and I would go to her if anything bothered me”, and, “More than happy with the care that is given to my (relative).”