The Gables

“We undertook this assessment as this was an unrated service following a change of Provider. We assessed the quality statements from all key questions; safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.”

“We found breaches of the regulations of safe care and treatment and good governance.”

“We found there were systems in place to ensure accidents and incidents were recorded and audited by the management team on a regular basis.”

“People were supported to access healthcare and other specialties services when they needed, and people and their families were involved in pre-admission assessments and regular ongoing reviews of their needs.”

“The provider took appropriate actions in informing the local authority in relation to any safeguarding concerns and staff told us they felt confident in recognising and raising any safeguarding concerns.”

“People’s needs and risks were reviewed regularly. Risks were identified and recorded appropriately within the care plans.”

“We found there was adequate staffing levels within the home, however there was a lack of management oversight in relation to the recruitment processes and documentation. We found staff received appropriate and suitable training which they felt allowed them to safely undertake their job roles.”

“We found the home to be clean with good accessibility for people with a range of needs. Some areas of the home were being used for storage which reduced the available space for people and created potential falls risks within the home.”

“The majority of medicines were found to be stored safely, including medicines that required additional security and record keeping, however the provider did not make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.”

“We saw evidence of people’s needs being assessed prior to admission and regularly being re assessed and reviewed after their admission. We saw that referrals were made to health care professionals where there was a concern or change in people’s needs.”

“We saw evidence of people being asked permission before tasks were undertaken with them.”

“People were encouraged to maintain relationships that were important to them. Peoples wishes and choices about care were respected. People were encouraged to personalise their rooms with their own possessions and things that were important to them.”

“Regular residents’ and family meetings were held where people were supported to provide feedback and contribute to decisions on topics such as menu planning.”

“Staff told us that they felt they had received appropriate training to enable them to undertake their job roles.”

“Care plans were person centred and included key relevant information about each individual person, including their communication needs.”

“People and their families told us that they were very satisfied with the level and quality of care being provided. Families told us they were aware of how to raise a complaint if they needed to. Families were confident their relative was treated fairly, and their rights were fully respected.”

“Staff worked closely with people, their families and professionals to ensure people received dignified and person-centred care at the end of their life.”

“Staff felt supported by the management team and felt listened to when they raised issues.”

“Staff meeting minutes evidenced there was good communication, sharing of information and an opportunity to discuss lessons learnt.”

“We found there was concerns around confidentiality and data…”