You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 6 August 2014
Date of Publication: 29 August 2014
Inspection Report published 29 August 2014 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 6 August 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

We reviewed this outcome as a follow-up from our last inspection on 4 and 23 October 2013. We had minor concerns that some people were not receiving care individual to their needs. The provider wrote to us and told us the action they had taken, or would take, to address the identified shortfalls. At this inspection on 6 August 2014 we found that the necessary improvements had been made.

Since our last inspection the service had changed to a fully computerised system for managing care documentation. The registered manager showed us how the system was able to identify when care plans and risk assessments that needed to be reviewed. The system showed when changes to care documentation were made. It was able to identify that staff had accessed the system and had read any changes or updates made. This told us staff were supporting people with the most up to date knowledge of their care needs.

At the time of our inspection on 6 August 2104, two young people were using the service for respite care. One person had left to attend a day centre and the other person was waiting to attend an ice skating trip. We reviewed both people's care records. We found that before people came to stay at the service for respite care a meeting was held with the person and their relatives or carers. At this meeting information was gathered about their support needs. The relatives completed their own assessment detailing how support was to be provided. All this information was then transferred into a support plan to provide staff with the information they needed to provide care.

We saw that the support plans were person centred and took into account people’s likes, dislikes and preferences. The support plans gave full details, for example, of how to assist people eating, mobility, communication and personal care. Where communication difficulties were identified, the support plans fully explained to staff how to communicate with the person. For example, where one person had poor vision, it explained to staff how to show objects to the person in their line of sight and how the person liked the use of touch to communicate effectively. Another person's support plan explained to staff how to communicate verbally with the person using short sentences, key words and allowing time to respond. This meant staff were provided with the information they needed to treat people with dignity and respect.

At our last inspection it was identified that medication was given to some people at the same time as their food or drinks without prior discussion with their GP to check if this practice was safe. We saw at this inspection that the service had written to people’s GP’s asking for direction when medication had to be given in this manner to ensure it was safe to do so. This information could then be incorporated into the care plan, so that staff had the appropriate guidance.

We saw that a range of assessments were completed including risk assessments, manual handling and personal evacuation plans. These assessments had been updated three monthly where appropriate. This was an improvement on our last inspection.

During our inspection we saw that staff interacted with people in a kind and friendly manner and were responsive to their needs. For example, where one person had their day centre visit cancelled the service immediately arranged for them to attend another activity in the community which was ice skating.