You are here

Archived: Care Purbeck

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 1 August 2014
Date of Publication: 17 March 2015
Inspection Report published 17 March 2015 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 1 August 2014, 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 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

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

Reasons for our judgement

The provider had a Management and Planning Policy that set out the management structure and strategic direction of Care Purbeck. The provider had a business plan that outlined risks to the service including staff shortages, recruitment and retention. This meant that the provider had identified risks to the business and had made appropriate arrangements against business failure.

The staffing hierarchy consists of a registered manager, office administrator and three care assistants. The registered manager or office administrator were on call at all times should a care assistant require support or advice. The provider told us that this helped to maintain standards of care at all times.

In the records we looked at we saw that each person had an assessment of risks in their personal care records. The risk assessments we looked covered all aspects of people’s living arrangements including hazards around the individuals home, personal care, use of mobility aids and risk of wandering and becoming lost in the community. All risk assessments were reviewed every six months or more regularly if new risks were identified.

There was evidence that the provider learnt lessons from audits and that appropriate changes had been implemented to improve the service they provided. The provider told us that they carried out spot checks of all of the staff on a monthly basis. The spot checks were undertaken to ensure that care staff were carrying their name badges as to ensure that service users could identify their carer. The spot checks also looked at punctuality, if care was carried out appropriately and whether care staff were promoting independence. We looked at the records of the spot checks and saw that Issues identified from the spot checks were routinely discussed with staff. A staff member told us “the spot checks are effective because the manager sometimes identifies how we can do things better or differently for a person.” We looked at the minutes of staff meetings and evidenced that findings from spot checks and recommendations for improvements to the service had been discussed.

The provider told us that they carried out periodic audits of the service to determine if areas the service they delivered could be improved upon. We looked at an audit of medicine administration carried out in May 2014. The audit had identified that improvements were needed to ensure that medication was administered more safely. In response the provider had implemented a new recording system for staff to use. We spoke with care staff who told us that the outcome of the audit had been discussed with them and that the implementation of the new system had improved the way in which they recorded medicines taken or refused by people who used the service.

The people who used the service, their relatives and staff were asked about their views on the quality of care provided. We looked at the annual survey undertaken in May 2014 and saw that service users and their relatives had rated the service as either good or excellent. In the survey people were asked whether care assistants turned up on time and if they wore their name badge. People were also asked if care staff were polite and professional. Comments from people who used the service and their relatives included, “the care is wonderful”, another commented “the carers are always chatty and cheerful.” We looked at a compliment that the provider had received recently in which a relative had said “thank you for being so professional, friendly and diligent.

The provider had not received any complaints since their last inspection but told us that they try to make the complaints policy as accessible as possible to people who used the service and their relatives. We looked at the complaints policy and saw that people could make a complaint verbally or in writing and that the registered manager will investigate and respond to all complaints within twenty one days. The policy also stated that the provider would