You are here

Dimensions 2 Buckby Lane Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 September 2013
Date of Publication: 19 October 2013
Inspection Report published 19 October 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 18 September 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, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

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

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on.

A survey of the views of people supported across all of the provider’s services, was carried out in May 2013. People were broadly happy about the support they received. Feedback form the people supported at Dimensions 2 Buckby lane and their families was not separately available. The provider may find it useful to note that in the absence of feedback specific to this service, it was not possible to be clear how people felt about the care and support provided there.

We looked at a range of records and systems usually used as part of maintaining an overview and managing services. We looked at the records of team meeting minutes. The most recent minutes in the team meeting file were dated January 2013. Staff said that a meeting had also taken place in July but no minutes were available for inspection. They told us that a more recent meeting had been cancelled due to an emergency. Staff said that the meetings were intended to be bi-monthly. We looked at the records of house meetings with the people supported. The most recent minutes in the file were dated August 2012. Staff told us these were infrequent and tended to be held around practical decision-making, such as around redecoration or holiday plans.

Some of the other recording systems in the home appeared to have ceased to be used, but were still available in the office. For example, the individual staff training records had not been kept up to date. There was also no overview of training available in the manager’s absence. Staff were able to obtain some additional information by phone from the provider’s head office. The manager and assistant manager both also managed another service in Tadley. Their management time was split between the two services. The rotas showed that the majority of management time had been spent at the other service recently. We were told this was because of the need to cover staff vacancies there. The provider may find it useful to note that there was some evidence that the sharing of the management team between this and another service, was impacting on management continuity and record keeping within the home.

The management audit in August 2013 stated that mandatory training had been completed by all staff who had been employed for over 12 weeks. ‘Compliance audits’ had been carried out in September 2012 and May 2013 by the provider. Issues of non-compliance were included in an action plan where they were identified. We saw that progress on addressing previous actions was monitored. A ‘service improvement plan’ for 2012-13 was in place and included evidence of on-going review.

The provider’s complaints policy was available in an easy-read format to assist in explaining it to the people supported. Only one recent complaint had arisen. This had been a noise-related complaint from neighbours. The manager had met with them and the matter had been resolved.