- Care home
Archived: Stanmore Residential Home
All Inspections
1 October 2013
During an inspection looking at part of the service
There was evidence that learning from incidents took place and appropriate changes were implemented. Water temperatures that had been recorded as high enough to present a risk of scalding had been addressed. We saw evidence that water temperatures were monitored weekly and any discrepancies were addressed without delay.
At our last inspection in July 2013 we found concerns with the arrangements for handling medicines. The provider wrote to us and told us that they had taken action to address the concerns. At this visit we saw that part of the plan was being acted upon but there were still concerns around medicine handling. We found that the provider did not have suitable arrangements for the recording and safe administration of medicines.
23 July 2013
During a routine inspection
We saw evidence that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff were employed, to show that they were fit to work with vulnerable adults.
Medicines were not obtained, recorded and kept safely in accordance with professional guidelines, and there was no system to audit the recording of medicines to recognise and address any possible errors.
There was evidence that learning from incidents did not take place and appropriate changes were not implemented. We noted that the record of weekly checks of hot water temperatures showed that in one person's room the water temperature was 55'C, which indicated that there was a risk of scalding. Water temperatures in some other rooms were recorded as low as 20'C, which is too cold for comfortable use. The provider did not take any action to address this.
17 December 2012
During an inspection in response to concerns
We had received a number of concerns relating to the safety and well-being of people using the service following a recent inspection by the local authority to monitor the service in line with there own contracting arrangements. We took those concerns seriously and conducted our own inspection.
We found the planning of people's care was not effective to ensure people were not at risk of receiving inappropriate or unsafe care.
26 November 2012
During an inspection looking at part of the service
Most of the people we spoke with said they were treated with dignity and respect. One person said staff were "nice with her when walking." When we observed staff, they treated people with dignity and respect, allowing people to take their time to move or eat.
All the people we spoke with said they enjoyed the food. Most of the people we spoke with said they got to choose what they ate and drank and when we observed staff, they offered choices to people before bringing them any food.
None of the people we spoke with had any concerns with the service. We found staff were aware of different types of abuse and knew most of the procedure regarding reporting suspected abuse.
Most of the people we spoke with said there were enough staff. One person said the staff were "very attentive". and that when we observed care, staff were not rushing.
All the records we viewed included information relevant to people's needs. Although some of this information was not detailed, the service was starting a new care plan which allowed them to add much more detail to its' care plans to ensure they clearly recorded people's needs.
6 September 2012
During a themed inspection looking at Dignity and Nutrition
We spoke with four people who use the service. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
Although all the people we spoke with were happy with the care they received, one person said they had moved rooms at least three times between floors without any reason given. The provider told us that they had discussed room moves with the person but that this had not been recorded. Another was not happy in the home and said the TV programme that had been put on for them was not their choice even though they were the only person in the room.
All the people we spoke with said they liked the food and drink they received. However, they all said they did not have a choice in what they could drink or eat. One person said the only drink option with lunch was orange squash, though they said they were happy with that. All the people we spoke with said that the home catered for people who had cultural needs such as people who were vegetarian.
The people we spoke said they had not raised any concerns with the service. They said that if they needed to, they would raise any concerns with staff.
All the people we spoke with felt there were enough staff to support their needs. One person said that staff were quick to answer their call bell. They all felt staff monitored them enough to ensure they were safe.