Inspection on 06/05/10 for Carrington House
Also see our care home review for Carrington House for more information
This is the latest available inspection report for this service, carried out on 6th May 2010.
CQC found this care home to be providing an Adequate service.
The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 4 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.
Other inspections for this house
Similar services:
What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.
What the care home does well
From returned surveys and contact made to us before this visit eight out of ten people living at the home and their relatives, feel that the food at the home is of a good standard. One person felt that the alternatives that were offered were insufficient and had concerns about the amount of drinks that were offered. We spoke to a further 6 people at this visit to ask their views about this area. All stated that they were satisfied with the meals provided. We saw that risk assessments had been completed in relation to nutritional needs. We also looked to see for one who had been assessed as being at risk of wight loss, had been referred to a dietitian and that supplements were in place if needed.This had been done, the supplements were stored in a locked cupboard alongside the medication in the home, the name of the person and details on how often they should be given were seen to be in place. However we did advise the service that a checking system should be introduced. This system would audit the stock of supplements, this would mean that it would be identified immediately if a person had not received a supplement when they should have and management could take immediate action to address this. We also looked at the storage of medication as we had made requirements in this area at the last inspection, these were noted to have been met. Observations were made during the visit and this included the serving of lunch. Eight people sitting in one of the lounges all had drinks available to them when we arrived, staff were seen to offer help to people who needed it so that they consumed any food or drink that had been given to them. We had been notified through both the number of notifications sent to us by the service and through Central Bedfordshire Council that there had been a high number of slips,trips and falls at the home. Prior to this inspection we requested documentation from the home to show what they were doing to reduce this. The information that they supplied showed that they undertook monthly monitoring, in addition if a person had frequent falls then they were referred to a falls clinic.
What the care home could do better:
We made observations during the visit in one of the communal areas, we sat for 1 hour and 10 minutes in this area, 8 residents were sat in this lounge. During that time there were no staff present for 35 minutes of that duration. On examination of staff rotas theses showed that sufficient staff numbers were on duty and this is supported by a report from Central Bedfordshire Council following a monitoring visit that they undertook, however there is a need to look at how those staff are deployed within the home. There is a need for staff to be located in areas where they are able to offer immediate assistance if for example someone was at risk of falling, this could result in prevention of that slip, trip or fall if they were in the immediate vicinity. We examined records for two people who were receiving treatment for wound care, dressings of these wounds were undertaken by a District Nurse and notes of these treatments were kept in the home. Risk assessments had been undertaken relating to risk in this area and care plans were in place detailing the treatment and support needed to be provided. We also checked that pressure relieving equipment was in place. However where instructions were given for the person to be moved/turned/change position no records had been maintained that this had been carried out. Staff confirmed verbally that it was, but there is a need to document this and include the time and who did this. This will provide a clear audit of support that has been provided. The Acting manager has been in post at this home since September 2009. A request had been made by the company to transfer an application that they had submitted for this manager at another home. On the day of inspection through contacting our registration Department direct, they confirmed that we had not received this application. There is a need for the Acting manager to submit an application to be registered. The type of reporting that the service has been making to us under regulation 37, needs to be looked at by management. Specific guidance is given on what we need to be notified of and headings are given to direct homes in this. Examples of what we should be notified of include a serious injury. However events are being reported to us under regulation 37, to the point where the service has added a heading, for example a person slipped and there was no injury. The approach means that management are not demonstrating their ability to fully manage and be responsible for the service. Matters that are deemed part of the day to day running of the home must be managed by the service. anything that goes wrong it would allow for them to say we reported it. In reporting day to day events where there is no requirement to report, places the commission in a position of managing the service instead of regulating it.