Archived: Dimensions 229 Stourbridge Road

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

Staff employed at the home had been recruited effectively. The manager demonstrated that appropriate checks had been obtained and that staff were trained and supported in their role.

We looked at how medications were managed and found that the staff were trained and demonstrated that they had appropriate knowledge and information. This meant that people could be confident that their medications would be administered safely and in accordance with the doctor's prescription.

The provider had systems in place to monitor accidents, incidents, complaints and concerns. We saw that there was a quality assurance programme and that required actions were incorporated into a continuous service improvement plan. This meant that people could be confident that lessons were learnt from mistakes made.

Bed side rails were being used for one person. They had not been risk assessed, and there was no documentation to support why they were being used. This meant that the person may have been at risk of unlawful control or restraint, and not protected from harm. We have asked the provider to tell us what actions they are going to take to comply with the requirements of the law.

Is the service effective?

We were unable to obtain detailed feedback from the three people living in the care home. We spent time in the communal areas, observed staff interactions with people, and read the care documentation.

We saw that staff supported people in a kind, caring and knowledgeable way. Staff were able to tell us what signs they would look for that might indicate a person was not happy or if they were agitated. We saw that staff responded effectively when a person's behaviour changed and they required additional support.

People's mental capacity had been considered and we saw that people and their families had been involved in the review process. One family member told us: "I have attended care reviews and think they are every 12 months. We are involved and kept up to date with any changes".

Is the service caring?

We saw that people living in the care home were treated with respect and dignity by staff. Staff were observed caring for people in a kind, confident and supportive manner. We saw that people receiving care responded positively to staff, and although they could not give full responses, one person called out to staff by name and smiled when they entered the room.

We saw that people's views were obtained in a number of ways. An annual survey was completed by people receiving care, with support from families if needed. Required actions were recorded in a report and then monitored for effectiveness by the quality assurance process.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that each person had an activity programme, and activities took place both in and out of the home.

We saw that people had access to external health professionals, and the input and guidance was documented in their support plans. Appointments had been made and attended with psychiatrists, occupational therapists, psychologists, chiropodists and dentists. A member of staff said: "I try to prepare people for appointments but if I can see they are upset or if they refuse, then I would cancel the appointment". This meant that people's rights were respected, and that people were supported to make choices.

Is the service well-led?

There were two manager's named on the registration records for this service. However, one manager left the service but had not completed the process to de-register themselves. The current manager also managed another service for the provider.

The provider had a quality assurance system and records showed us that actions were taken in response to issues or concerns identified.

We saw that staff were supported in their roles, and there were effective recruitment, induction and training programmes in place.

Entries in the care documentation confirmed that views from external agencies were obtained and taken into account to ensure that people received appropriate their individual needs.

We were unable to communicate verbally with the people who lived in the home. During the inspection we spent time in the communal areas of the home so we could observe what happened. We saw that staff were gentle and spoke kindly to people. We saw that staff had a kind and caring approach towards people they supported. We saw that people responded positively to the interactions from staff.

We spoke with two relatives who said, 'They (staff) do it rather well, I'm always impressed". And "They are wonderful".

We looked at peoples nutrition. We saw that people were offered choices of healthy nutritious meals that they enjoyed.

We looked at the support offered to staff. We found that staff were given appropriate training and were supported in their role.

We looked at complaints and found that the service had not received any complaints, but had procedures in place to deal with these appropriately.

We saw that staff had a kind and caring approach towards people they supported. People were encouraged and supported by staff to do as much as possible for themselves within their individual limitations. People were supported to continue to enjoy their individual hobbies and interests, either at home or within the community.

We found that people who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse. We spoke with a relative who told us people were safe and well cared for at Stourbridge Road.

We found that thorough recruitment procedures were in place. This ensured that people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

The provider had systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. This ensured that people who used the service were not placed at risk of receiving inappropriate care.