You are here

Archived: Rushall Care Centre

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 June 2014
Date of Publication: 19 July 2014
Inspection Report published 19 July 2014 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

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 5 June 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff, reviewed information sent to us by other authorities and talked with other authorities.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

At our last inspection in June 2013, we found the registered person had not consistently respected and involved people who use services.

The provider sent us an action plan. This told us what improvements the provider would make to respecting people who use services.

At this inspection we discussed this with the manager. They told us that since the last inspection, a member of staff had been selected as the dignity champion for the home. We saw that information resources to raise awareness of dignity issues were displayed within the home. This meant that people living at the home, staff and visitors were made aware of the need to maintain people’s privacy, dignity and independence at all times.

One relative told us: “They try to make it home from home. They put [my relative’s] tapes on in the evening. We can visit any time”.

One person told us: “[My relative] visits on a Sunday and shares a meal with me”.

We saw staff ask people if they wanted their nails cut and painted as this was on the activity list for the day we visited. One person said: “I just want them filing”. We saw that this was done and staff massaged hand cream into their hands. The person said: “I am enjoying this”.

Another person told us: “I love it here. I can do anything I want. As long as I have my frame, I am fine. I like to stay around here. I don’t want for anything. I’ve been out to the shops and the arboretum with staff. I like to dance. I get up and use my frame. I’ve always loved dancing” and: “I get on with all the staff. They always speak with me and call me by my name”.

We saw that all staff had completed equality and diversity training. We saw good examples of how staff promoted peoples’ dignity during the course of our inspection. We saw some examples of where practice could be improved.

We discussed this with the manager and regional manager. The manager told us they had observed similar examples of where staff practice could be improved. They told us they 'walked the floor' every day to observe care delivery and discussed areas for improvement with individual staff. They told us they would organise ‘resident experience’ training for all staff. This training supports staff to raise their own awareness of how their practice might impact on people who receive care. We will check this at our next inspection.

We completed two informal observations during the course of the inspection. This helped us to better understand the experience of people who could not talk directly with us. We observed people living in the home and how staff interacted with them in the morning in the lounge area and at lunchtime.

We observed that staff had positive, warm relationships with people living at the home. We saw that staff checked whether people liked their meals and whether they wanted more food and drink. During our observations we found that staff talked with people about what was happening in the community and local events.

As part of our observations we checked how people were supported to eat meals in their rooms where they were unable to get out of bed. We saw one person who was lying in bed being assisted to eat by a member of staff. The member of staff was standing above the person with a plate of hot food. Some of the food fell on the person’s serviette and then the serviette was pressed into the person’s neck. This practice posed a safety risk to the person and did not respect their dignity. The manager told us they had also observed this on the day of our inspection and had spoken with staff about this.

We saw that one member of staff put a serviette around someone to protect their clothes. We found that the person was not asked whether they were happy for this to be placed around them.

We found that some staff referred to people as ‘darling’ and ‘sweetheart’. We were also referred to in this way during the course of our inspection. The manager told us that where people were happy to be referred to in this way, it was recorded in th