You are here

Archived: Greycliffe Manor Good

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: 15 April 2013
Date of Publication: 15 May 2013
Inspection Report published 15 May 2013 PDF

People should be cared for by staff who are properly qualified and able to do their job (outcome 12)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by staff who are fit, appropriately qualified and are physically and mentally able to do their job.

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 15 April 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 and talked with staff.

We had a tour of the home, spoke with the manager, area manager and provider.

Our judgement

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. However, improvements to the recruitment procedure were needed for any new staff employed.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at the recruitment files for three members of staff. All of the staff had been recruited under the previous ownership.

All files contained a completed application form, references, qualifications, training and declaration of health.

There was evidence that Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) checks had been completed for all staff. We saw there was no clear risk assessment in place to show the decision made when staff were employed who had a criminal conviction, warning or caution.

We saw that one of the three files did not contain any copies of photographic identity documents, for example a passport or driving licence. The provider may wish to note that every recruitment file should contain documents to show proof of identity.

We saw all files contained two written references. However, the provider may wish to note that the second references were not from previous employers but from friends or colleagues. This means that previous employment conduct may not be obtained.

All files contained an employment contract from the previous employer. The new provider explained new contracts were in the process of being written.

We saw all files contained interview records. The provider may wish to note that these records did not fully examine gaps in employment dates or checks of staff CRB declarations.

We saw evidence that new members of staff underwent a trial period of employment during which time they were closely observed and supervised. Care workers said the length of this period depended upon their individual experience and ability.