Archived: Dimensions 11 Allenby Road

11 Allenby Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 5BF (01628) 783573

Provided and run by:
Dimensions (UK) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

1, 7 October 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service, because the people using the service had complex needs which meant not all were able to tell us their experiences

We spoke with two people who use the service and three relatives/advocates. They were complimentary about the care received. One relative of a person who uses the service told us 'There is always a nice atmosphere when I go to the home.'

Care was planned with the involvement of the people who use the service and their relatives where appropriate. Care planned reflected their individual needs. We found people were provided with appropriate care to meet their needs.

During our inspection we observed a clean environment throughout the home. Relatives we spoke with told us the home was always kept clean and tidy. People were not protected from the risk of infection because some of the guidelines published by the Department of Health had not been followed.

The home was secure and care workers had to ring the doorbell to enter the main entrance to the home. Visitors were asked for identification before being allowed entry.

We found corridors in the home and fire exits free of clutter and easily accessible on the ground floor. However people who use the service, staff and visitors were not protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises. During our inspection we observed potential risks in relation to the design and layout of the home. For example, we saw risks on entering the garden area and accessing the laundry room.

All the required information checks were in place prior to the employment of staff with the exception of full employment histories. The provider was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation for these gaps in employment histories. This meant the provider did not have an effective recruitment process, to ensure that people who use the service were not placed at risk of being cared for by staff who were not suitable.

There were processes in place for recording, investigating and resolving complaints from people who use the service and their relatives. The provider had written information on their complaints procedure, including an easy read version. However, these had not been made available to users of the service and their relatives.

People's records and other records relevant to the management of the service were accurate and fit for purpose. Records, with the exception of the maintenance and cleaning audits could be located promptly when requested. However people's records were not securely kept.

28 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We found that people were treated with respect. One person told us that they "like it here" and another said that staff were "good". People had suitable personalised support and health action plans and were involved in a range of meaningful activities. They were involved in educational and leisure activities. One person told us that "I go to college" and described their activities like cooking sessions. People privacy and dignity was respected.

Care staff were suitably supported in their roles and we found them to be person-centred in their approach.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse.

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