Archived: Dainton House

When we carried out this inspection there were 10 people using the service. We spoke with three members of staff and five people who use the service. We considered our inspection findings to answer the question we had asked previously: Is the service safe?

Was the service safe?

All five people we spoke with told us they thought the environment had improved and they were happy with the changes. One person said, "Yes, it's changed here. I like it. I'm happy." Another person told us, "I like my new floor." Bedrooms had been redecorated and most had new wooden floors to replace the dirty carpets. Two rooms still had carpets, but these were clean and in good condition.

We found that stair carpets had been replaced and bathrooms had been refurbished and were clean. The premises were generally well decorated and in a good state of repair. Staff told us about plans for further improvement and said a more formal refurbishment schedule would be in place by the time of our next visit.

The improvements made to the premises helped to ensure a safe and pleasant environment that promoted people's wellbeing and met their needs.

At this inspection we spoke with the chief operations officer, the manager, three members of staff and four people who use the service. We considered our inspection findings to answer the question we had asked previously: Is the service safe?

Was the service safe?

At the last inspection in October 2013 we found there were not enough qualified staff to meet people's needs. At this inspection we were told by the chief operations officer and the manager that changes had been made to ensure people's needs would be met. This included implementing a new waking night staff post.

We examined the staff rotas and we found there were sufficient numbers of qualified staff on duty during the day and at night. There were usually three staff on duty and at night one waking night staff person was on duty.

At this inspection we also spoke with four people living at Dainton House and asked them if they felt there were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people. All the people told us they thought there were enough staff on duty. One person said, " Yes there are enough staff on duty". Another person said, " Yes there are enough staff on duty but I think it would be better if there were more male members of staff so that male and female staff numbers were roughly equal. It would help if there was any trouble, like there was in the past".

We spoke with staff about staffing levels and they told us they felt there was sufficient staff cover to meet the needs of the current client group living in the home. One care worker said, "I understand there were some occasions in the past when there were not enough staff on duty but I think there are now." Another care worker said, "Its better now than it was before."

With regards to our findings about the environment, the action plan we received from the provider after the inspection in October 2013 stated, " We will be creating a yearly maintenance plan which will be taking into account each area of the house and any work that needs to be completed. This will include the yearly maintenance of the project which will be taking into account improvements that need to be made in order to keep the house at a good standard of repair/decoration."

At this inspection we found that this measure stated above by the provider had not been effective as the premises had not been maintained to a satisfactory standard and there were new concerns to do with the condition of three bedrooms, two bathrooms and the laundry room and toilet, close to the kitchen. The conditions found on this inspection did not ensure that people were living in a suitable and appropriate environment that promoted their physical and mental health as well as their safety.

We saw that the care and support plans contained in depth and thorough information that was regularly reviewed and updated. The plans were underpinned by risk assessments. These included psychological risk assessments. We saw that people signed a contract and copy of the complaints policy when they moved in.

The people using the service we spoke with had a range of views about the care and support they received. Some people told us 'I feel safe here and there are enough staff' and 'I'm involved in community meetings once per week and also therapy meetings' whilst others said 'This is run shoddily, what they tell you to get you in here is one thing, but the reality is very different'.

People we spoke with said 'I'm doing ok with the community project and am moving to independent living', 'Normally staff are in the office and I don't have any interaction' and 'My family are now in touch and ask me to ring them up'.

During our visit we saw that the building was in need of cleaning, redecoration and updating of furniture. The lounge area only had three old sofas and there was limited furniture. We saw that one person's bedroom had stained pillows which needed to be replaced.

Staff received postgraduate training to support their work and enable career progression. We saw copies of the postgraduate handbook that provided details of the six modules. Staff could not work as a therapist until they had completed the postgraduate qualification.

During the visit we identified concerns with the levels of staff on shift to provide the level of support required by the people living at Dainton House. There was one staff member who slept on site during the night and on average two members of staff worked during the day on weekends.

Members of staff said 'The organisation are out of touch with what happens on a daily basis' and 'We can move on, they (People using the service) can't'.

We saw that the policies and procedures provided clear explanations of rules and conditions of stay, and that these were reflected in the contract and guides for service users, explaining people's rights as well as responsibilities.

People we spoke with told us that they were involved with the care planning process. They told us that they signed relevant documents to indicate their involvement in and, as appropriate, their agreement with them. We found that this was reflected in people's care plans and assessments.

We saw that the home had clear multi-agency procedures in place for protecting vulnerable adults, in accordance with the local authority guidelines. We also saw that staff had received training in safeguarding and that suitable employment checks had been made, including Criminal Records Bureau checks.

People said that they were happy with the building and their rooms. One person told us that he felt he "had a great room" and that Dainton House was a "great place to stay".

People we spoke with told us that they found it easy to speak to staff and the manager. One person told us, "you can go to the office any time you like if you need to speak to someone". We found that referrals and progress of people who used the service were discussed with senior management and recorded.