Archived: Hazelmere

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

People were not always kept safe because they were not protected against the risks associated with medicines. This was because the provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. We found that the agency's medicines policy was not consistently followed. Support plans did not always reflect people's current medicines needs and there were occasional 'gaps' in medicines record keeping that did not support and evidence the safe administration of medicines.

Where risks to people's safety had been identified we saw that risk assessments had been drawn up. However, they had not been reviewed since the provider took over the running of Hazelmere in December 2013.

We found that staffing numbers were not adequate and several people who lived at Hazelmere raised concerns that they never received their care at the required time. Some people reported that their carers sometimes never turned up.

People who lived at Hazelmere told us they felt safe. Staff were knowledgeable of the types of abuse that could occur and new how to report it. The provider had adhered to legal requirements and had informed and updated the commission with regards to any incidents of concern at Hazelmere.

Is the service effective?

The care provided was not always effective as sometimes staff did not arrive to deliver the care in people's apartments. People told us that they sometimes had to wait for long periods of time to be assisted and this had impacted on their welfare

Although staff had been provided with training in order to meet the needs of the people who used the service, we saw that no training had been provided to support people who had dementia.

Is the service caring?

The service was not always caring. Many people told us that they were not always supported by staff who knew them well. Although people said they were treated with kindness and respect, three people told us they felt rushed as they knew staff were short of time and needed to provide care for others.

The service did not always listen to or consult people about how they would like to receive their care. Three people told us they were not involved in the planning of their care. Two people were not aware they had a care plan.

Is the service responsive?

The service was not responsive to people's needs. People's care needs were not assessed regularly and this resulted in their care plans being out of date and not reflecting their current needs.

Some people told us they had raised concerns about different people supporting them in their homes. While some said the new manager responds to concerns quickly, others said they felt dismissed when they raised concerns.

Is the service well-led?

The service was not always well-led and changes had recently been made to the managerial structure at Hazelmere. In August 2014, the provider made us aware a new manager had been appointed and they would be applying for registration with the Commission.

It was clear that the concerns we found on this inspection had been picked up by the provider beforehand through their auditing systems. However, we asked people if they felt involved in assessing the service and if their views had been sought. Most people told us they did not feel involved. We saw that no formal processes were in place for obtaining people's views about the service.

Staff said the new management team were approachable and were confident that any concerns raised would be appropriately addressed by them. Staff said morale had recently improved and felt the service was improving after recent concerns.