A Dalmellington nursing home was placed under the microscope during an unannounced spot check by the Care Inspectorate.
Glebe House Care Home, on Cumnock Road, was graded ‘good’ across two quality indicators and ‘adequate’ across three others.
The fresh gradings follow a visit to the service in July with the findings now published.
Among the key messages the Care Inspectorate said people were “well presented” and appeared “content.”
Ans staff demonstrated “kind and compassionate practice” when supporting people.
However, quality assurance processes were “not always effective” in identifying risks and improvements “were required” to ensure people’s needs were both accurately assessed and met.
The Care Inspectorate also flagged up care planning documentation which they said required “further work” to “strengthen it.”
Glebe House Care Home is registered to provide care for up to 44 people. The service provider is Priory CC151 Limited.
An extract from the Care Inspectorate report said: “We identified some strengths, but these just outweighed weaknesses.
“We observed warm and kind interactions between staff and people living in the service. Staff knew people well and responded to their needs appropriately. People were well presented and relatives spoke positively about the care provided, with one describing staff as “very nice.”
The report did pick up on one issue within the home, saying: “Some people required support and observation to prevent weight loss. Documentation was not always accurate, some assessments were incorrect and concerns were not always escalated despite deterioration being recorded. This meant opportunities had been missed to improve the health and wellbeing of people affected.
“The service had identified people who required support to maintain skin integrity through detailed assessments. We sampled records which indicated that although assessed, people were not always receiving the correct support to prevent skin deterioration. Charts were not consistently completed, and plans were not updated to reflect people’s skin integrity needs. Wound care was not always well documented, meaning we could not be assured key interventions had taken place for people at appropriate times.”
And medication was “generally well managed” for most people but there were remaining issues.
The report said: “The management team had recognised errors in staff administration practices that had resulted in formal proceedings to prevent recurrence. This meant swift action had been taken to ensure people were safe and well.
“However, we sampled records that indicated errors had continued despite being addressed previously, and that dosage times were not always being adhered to. This placed people at risk of harm.”
Setting and staff team were both graded ‘good’ but leadership, supporting people’s wellbeing and planned care and support only achieved a grading of ‘adequate.’
One requirement, set out at the inspection- and to be in placed by October 26- says bosses must ensure people receive “safe and responsive care” that “meets their needs and promotes their health and wellbeing.”
In addition, bosses must ensure that quality assurance processes are “carried out effectively” and in a manner which “achieves improvements” to service delivery and outcomes for people.
Article continues below