You are here

Archived: Regis House

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: 14 November 2013
Date of Publication: 12 December 2013
Inspection Report published 12 December 2013 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

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 14 November 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

Reasons for our judgement

We saw that people who used the service were asked for their views about their care and support and these were acted on. We spoke with three people who confirmed they were asked each month in the meetings held for people. We saw records of these meetings which included actions to be taken and feedback to people. All staff spoken with confirmed that people were given feedback when actions were taken and they were able to give examples of changes that resulted from people’s views. The provider confirmed that the information gathered was used to improve the service. This meant that people were able to comment on the service they received and there were processes in place to act on people’s views.

Some staff spoken with told us that they were asked for their views about the home and these were listened to and acted on if they helped the people who lived there. We saw records that showed that regular staff meetings were held. All staff we spoke with confirmed this. One member of staff said, “We can speak to the manager freely about our views on how the home is run and your views are valued.”

We saw that a system was in place for recording incidents and monitoring trends. Staff we spoke with confirmed that they recorded all incidents that happened. We saw evidence that lessons were learnt from incidents and appropriate changes were implemented. The provider and some of the staff were able to give us examples of changes implemented as a result of learning from incidents. This meant that the provider had a system to ensure incidents were recorded, any trends monitored, and used the information to learn and improve the service.

We found that audits had been carried out at corporate and unit level. The audits we saw clearly identified where improvement was needed. We saw that action plans with time scales to make improvements were put in place. The provider confirmed that they carried out these audits regularly to monitor the quality of service provided. This meant that the provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service they provide.

We saw that the equipment provided in the home had been regularly tested and serviced to ensure it was safe for people to use.

We found that the provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service. We saw records of complaints made and observed that they had been dealt with appropriately and resolved satisfactorily. We found that information was made available in accessible format to people explaining how they could complain. This information was readily available in communal areas of the home. All the people we spoke with told us they were very happy with the service and they all knew how to make a complaint if they had to. The staff we spoke with were also able to explain what they would do if someone had a complaint. This meant that the provider had a system in place to allow people to complain.