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

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 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

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

Reasons for our judgement

Systems were in place to assess and improve the quality of services provided. For example people using the service, relatives and visiting professionals were asked to complete comment cards. We saw two of these displayed in the hall which related to positive feedback about the environment of the home.

We saw thank you cards received by the service. One read “Thank you for the loving care.” Another read “Thank you for the care and comfort you gave.”

People told us they were listened to, and that their views were taken seriously. One person said “I just chat with X (the manager) she sorts anything out for me.”

Systems for involving people were in place. For example, regular residents and relatives meetings were held. The manager told us feedback received at these meetings had included suggestions for changes to the menu. For example people had requested more curries and for battered fish to return to the menu. Staff said they felt involved in the running of the service, and that their suggestions were listened to. The manager explained staff meetings were also held and suggestions listened to. For example staff had requested more staff during busy times. All these suggestions had been put into place.

Systems for analysing and managing risk were in place. For example regular audits were undertaken by the provider and area manager. These included environment checks, audits of staff training and care provided.

We saw provider visits had identified areas of risk and areas which needed redecoration. For example we saw new carpets were being fitted, bedrooms were being re decorated and the office relocated to the front of the home.

The home was well managed and organised. Staff were aware of which people they supported each shift. Staff also had lists of tasks they were expected to complete which were monitored by senior staff at the home. For example, tidying wardrobes, cleaning commodes, cleaning washing machines, doing the laundry and cleaning walking frames.

We saw checklists to identify which staff had done these tasks. Care workers said “It’s a way of making sure everything gets done. It works very well.”

Kitchen hygiene was well managed. The home had just had an inspection by the Environmental Health Office EHO and had awarded the home with the highest 5* rating for hygiene.