Archived: The Doris Watts Care Home

Several people told us that living in the home "was alright". One person told us "don't ask".

We saw the care files for five people, the two in the new format (created since our last inspection) were detailed whilst the three in the old format remained poor. This made it difficult to confirm people's needs were being met.

We observed poor care practices during our inspection on 3 March 2013 and made two safeguarding referrals to the Oxfordshire Safeguarding Team. These are being investigated.

Some people that we spoke with said the food was good others said it was ok. One the second day of inspection we observed two people who required a soft diet and given a liquidised meal.

Care staff appeared very busy and the three care staff on duty confirmed there was not sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of the 16 people.

The complaints procedure was incorrect as it told people wishing to make a complaint that they should contact the CQC, where as it should have been the provider in the first instance.

We observed medication prescribed to be given at 12pm, being given at 1.15pm, we discussed with the member of staff administering medication and told medication was late because staff were very busy.

We did not observe people being taken or prompted to go to the toilet before lunch was served.

We found people in the home were offered a choice of meal and drinks. We observed staff were supporting people in a respectful manner. Food and fluid charts for one person were not being completed accurately.

We found staffing levels were satisfactory.

We found inconsistencies in record keeping. Records were not up to date and one person's daily recordings could not be located.

Following several safeguarding referrals made by sources outside the service. We decided to assess the provider's compliance with this essential standard. We had been told that safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse training had been provided by the manager at Robert and Doris Watts home. Names and dates of staff who received training was not available, therefore we were unable to confirm the safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse training had been provided.

We looked at storage of medication, medication administration records and records of controlled drugs. All were seen to be satisfactory. One person administers their own medication, with agreement from their GP.

The deputy manager told us that six members of staff had not received training in the use of the hoist or manual handling belt, but this was being planned. None of the people requiring hoisting had been assessed by an appropriate healthcare professional and as a result incorrect moving and handling equipment was being used.