You are here

Archived: Swiss Cottage Care Home

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14, 22 November 2013
Date of Publication: 4 January 2014
Inspection Report published 04 January 2014 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

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 14 November 2013 and 22 November 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 carers and / or family members, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

People were cared for by staff who had not always been supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. This could result in people receiving inconsistent care and support as a result.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with 16 staff employed to work at the service. One nurse told us the manager had been organising training and they had recently attended catheter care and venepuncture training. Staff we spoke with told us they had recently completed training in dementia.

We were provided with information from the manager in relation to staff training. The records showed that of the 20 staff working on the Cedar unit (the dementia care unit) 12 had not completed fire training, 13 staff had not completed practical moving and handling training and seven staff the moving and handling theory training. In addition, six staff had yet to complete basic food hygiene, five first aid awareness training and seven infection control training. Dementia training records for staff showed that seven staff had not received dementia training. Our observations during the day found that the staff’s approach to dementia care was not person centred and we would question the quality of the dementia care training.

A regional manager, the manager and the deputy manager spoke about the provider’s new approach to dementia care. This was called Positively Enriching And enhancing Residents Lives (PEARL). Staff had completed the initial training for this on 31 October 2013, however, some staff we spoke with told us they were still awaiting the date for their training to commence. We were informed it would involve all staff, in all roles. Although this is a positive step we were told that it would take a year to roll out in its entirety.

We looked at the induction programmes for registered nurses and care assistants. These showed that the induction consisted of a two day introduction to the organisation and the home. Following this, staff worked at the home and shadowed more experienced staff until they felt competent in their roles. A nurse we spoke with told us that they had not received a formal induction but had to pick things up as they went along.

We looked at a matrix for staff supervision. We saw that staff were receiving formal supervision approximately every two months. Staff we spoke with confirmed that they received regular supervision. We spoke with a unit manager who told us she undertook the supervision of care assistants working in the unit. Staff told us they felt able to raise issues or concerns when necessary during their supervision sessions. The manager told us that staff meetings were erratic. The unit manager for Cedar unit said she was about to implement regular unit meetings.

Overall our findings demonstrate that systems for staff to share information and receive training and support were not adequately established. This meant that people could receive inconsistent care and support as a result.