You are here

Dimensions 2 Buckby Lane Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 3 July 2014
Date of Publication: 19 August 2014
Inspection Report published 19 August 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 3 July 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out by a social care inspector whose focus was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

On the day of the inspection three people were living in 2, Buckby Lane. We spoke with two people who use the service. One person had complex needs and was not able to communicate with us verbally. However, we were able to find out about their experience of the service by observing care and talking with their family and staff. During our inspection we also spoke with the registered manager, a lead support worker, four care workers, a visiting health professional and a financial appointee. We also spoke with the parents of the three people who use the service.

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

Relatives of people told us that they trusted the manager and staff to �keep their relatives safe and well.� One relative told us, �I couldn�t do any better. I am so pleased they are there because the staff are always quick to realise if they are poorly and do something about it.�

People were protected from the risk of inappropriate or unsafe care because the provider had an effective system to identify, assess and manage risks to their health, safety and welfare. We found that the provider had reviewed people's risk assessments to reflect changes in their needs.

Two people had appointees to ensure their finances were managed properly and to protect them from financial abuse. We spoke with one of the financial appointees who told us that they had reviewed the person's finances with the person's key worker in September 2013. We saw this review had been recorded within the person's support plan,

The provider had an effective process to manage medicines safely. During our inspection we observed two care workers administer medicines appropriately, in the way people preferred, detailed within their medication plan.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found the location to be meeting the requirements of the DoLS. Whilst no applications had been submitted, the manager was reviewing whether any applications needed to be made in response to the recent Supreme Court judgement in relation to DoLS.

Is the service effective?

We found that the provider had an effective system to ensure staff received appropriate learning and development. We reviewed staff records which showed the provider supported staff with an effective system of training, supervision and appraisal.

We found that the service had effectively managed people�s nutritional and hydration requirements. Where necessary people had assessments and plans completed by speech and language therapists. We saw people were supported to eat a healthy balanced diet by staff who had been trained regarding nutrition and food safety.

Care practices we observed demonstrated that staff knew the needs of people and how to communicate with them.

Where people lacked the capacity to make specific decisions the provider had assessed this and had followed the correct legal processes to make decisions in peoples� best interests.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and compassionate staff, who spoke with people in a caring manner. We saw that care workers gave encouragement to support people who were able to do things at their own pace.

One person told us the staff, �Are are nice, they are my friends�. One person�s relatives told us, �The staff are excellent. You can feel that they really care for the people in the home and it is not just a job.� Another relative told us, �Their key worker is always looking to do things which improve the quality of their life.�

Is the service responsive?

We saw evidence that when people�s care needs had changed the service had been responsive to this. They had recognised changes in people's needs and engaged other services to ensure appropriate actions were taken to meet these.

The service had a complaints system which was readily accessible to people. This ensured staff listened to their concerns and responded to them effectively.

On the day of our inspection we saw the service had arranged appointments for people with different health professionals in swift response to health issues identified whilst providing personal care.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager in place and staff told us that the service was well led. We found there were processes and systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.

One care worker told us, �Things have definitely improved since the new manager and team leader arrived. Now there is always someone to discuss problems with and things get done about them.�

We read the provider�s business improvement plan for the service. We noted that identified actions in relation to required improvements had been allocated to specific people, together with relevant target dates to achieve them. We found the registered manager had monitored progress of these actions.