You are here

Archived: Kingsthorpe View Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 June 2013
Date of Publication: 10 July 2013
Inspection Report published 10 July 2013 PDF

There should be enough members of staff to keep people safe and meet their health and welfare needs (outcome 13)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by sufficient numbers of appropriate staff.

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 2013, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff, reviewed information sent to us by other regulators or the Department of Health and talked with other regulators or the Department of Health.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

There were not enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

Reasons for our judgement

The low staffing levels within the home meant there was a risk that people’s needs were not consistently met. In addition to the care staff there was one nurse on duty during our inspection.

We spoke to two relatives of people using the service. We asked them what they thought about the staffing levels within the home. One person said, “They are occasionally short staffed.” Another person said, “I think they do what they can with what they have got.”

We looked at the staffing rota for the last month and checked to ensure that the service had maintained staffing levels in line with their view of staffing requirements for people’s needs. The staff rota we saw was not fit for purpose, there were gaps where we were informed people had been working but they not been included within the rota. The manager and deputy manager were able to provide a verbal explanation of who had worked when and confirmed there was a minimum of one nurse available at all times. The remaining staff consisted of a group of senior carers and carers, cooking, cleaning and administrative staff. No consideration appeared to have been given, in terms of the mix of staff available. For example, on one occasion we observed four senior carers working with a smaller number of care staff and on a separate day there was only one senior carer with more junior staff. The manager explained that a number of the carers were experienced and did not require senior support. We were also informed there was an electronic system which had been used to record staff hours, which would support the verbal explanation provided for the staff rota.

To help us understand the experiences of people living in the home we used our SOFI (Short Observational Framework for Inspection) tool during the visit. The SOFI tool allows us to spend time watching what is going on in a service and helps us to record how people spend their time, the type of support they get and whether they have positive experiences.

Some people ate their lunch in the dining area but other people ate their meals in a separate lounge within the home. We observed people in the dining area were mostly able to eat their meals independently; however they sometimes had to wait for assistance if it was needed because staff members were assisting other people. In one instance a person left the dining area without receiving any interaction from staff at all. Staff realised this person had left and had not yet been offered a dessert. This meant people did not receive assistance in a timely manner and staff were not always available to help.

During our inspection we observed medication had not been administered on schedule due to the insufficient number of nurses working within the home. There was one nurse on duty upon our arrival and this meant people were at risk of not receiving the appropriate levels of care and support.

We spoke to four staff. One member of staff said, “There used to be two nurses and now there is one. This is not enough.” Another member of staff said, “There are not enough staff to meet the needs of people.”

Overall we found there were insufficient numbers of staff to meet the care and welfare needs of people using the service.