St Colum­ban’s home in Magher­amore is given a pos­i­tive re­port



ST Colum­ban’s Nurs­ing Home in Magher­amore re­ceived a pos­i­tive re­port fol­low­ing a visit from an in­spec­tor from Health In­for­ma­tion and Qual­ity Au­thor­ity.

The cen­tre is a pur­pose built single storey build­ing that ac­com­mo­dates up to 24 res­i­dents and is lo­cated within the St Colum­ban’s Sis­ters Con­vent.

The nurs­ing home was judged on 17 dif­fer­ent reg­u­la­tions and was found to be com­pli­ant over 13 of them, sub­stan­tially com­pli­ant re­gard­ing three of them and non com­pli­ant over a single reg­u­la­tion.

Through­out the in­spec­tion res­i­dents were seen to be treated with dig­nity and re­spect and choices were be­ing re­spected. The in­spec­tor also found that res­i­dents were sat­is­fied with the ser­vice and praised staff for their hard work and found them to be ‘al­ways cour­te­ous, and very po­lite when sup­port­ing res­i­dents in their daily lives or when pro­vid­ing care’.

Res­i­dents found the group ex­er­cise classes to be in­valua- ble and also spoke of the in­put from the re­li­gious con­gre­ga­tion which they thor­oughly ap­pre­ci­ated.

The in­spec­tor was also sat­is­fied that gov­er­nance and man­age­ment ar­range­ments en­sured the de­liv­ery of safe, ap­pro­pri­ate care to res­i­dents.

Ac­cord­ing to the in­spec­tor re­port ‘The provider had a pos­i­tive ap­proach to reg­u­la­tion and a good his­tory of com­pli­ance. In­for­ma­tion was be­ing gath­ered and re­viewed to in­form the qual­ity and safety of care. Fur­ther im­prove­ments were re­quired to use this in­for­ma­tion in com­plet­ing the an­nual re­view of the qual­ity and safety of the ser­vice pro­vided’.

The reg­u­la­tions St Colum­ban’s were judged to be com­pli­ant with in­cluded a di­rec­tory of res­i­dents which was main­tained and con­tained the in­for­ma­tion re­quired in the reg­u­la­tions. They were also in com­pli­ance with in­sur­ance reg­u­la­tions as ev­i­dence was avail­able that in­sur­ance was in place.

A state­ment of pur­pose was avail­able which ac­cu­rately de­scribed the ser­vice that was pro­vided in the cen­tre.

Poli­cies and pro­ce­dures were in place for the man­age­ment of com­plaints. An ac­ces­si­ble com­plaints pro­ce­dure was in place. The num­ber of com­plaints re­ceived was min­i­mal.

Ad­e­quate wardrobe space was pro­vided in each room. This in­cluded lock­able space for res­i­dents to keep their pos­ses­sions. Laun­dry was at­tended to in the ad­join­ing con­vent and the laun­dry room was clean, or­gan­ised and spa­cious.

There were sys­tems in place to en­sure that a choice of good qual­ity nu­tri­tious meals, drinks and snacks were pro­vided to res­i­dents. There were ad­e­quate staff avail­able to pro­vide as­sis­tance to res­i­dents.

A res­i­dents’ guide was avail­able and met the re­quire­ments of the reg­u­la­tions. Staff had at­tended in­fec­tion con­trol train­ing and staff spo­ken with were clear re­gard­ing pro­ce­dures to fol­low if re­quired. It was noted that hand hy­giene gels were lo­cated around the cen­tre, and the in­spec­tor saw staff us­ing them.

Res­i­dents also had ac­cess to a wide range of health care ser­vices. De­tailed care plans were in place which out­lined pos­si­ble trig­gers and use­ful in­ter­ven­tions. Ad­vice, sup­port, and re­views were read­ily avail­able from the psy­chi­atric ser­vices.

Staff had re­ceived train­ing in re­la­tion to the de­tec­tion, and preven­tion of, and re­sponse to abuse, as re­quired by the reg­u­la­tions and a de­tailed pol­icy was in place to guide prac­tice.

There was a per­son cen­tred ap­proach to the res­i­dents in the cen­tre that re­spected their pri­vacy and dig­nity and res­i­dents were con­sulted about how the cen­tre was run and could make choices about how to live their lives.

St Colum­ban’s were judged to be sub­stan­tially com­pli­ant in three reg­u­la­tions cat­e­gories. There were suf­fi­cient re­sources in place to en­sure the de­liv­ery of safe, qual­ity care ser­vices. How­ever, while the in­spec­tor found a range of clin­i­cal au­dits were com­pleted, it was not al­ways clear how these led to im­prove­ments in the qual­ity of the ser­vice.

Con­tract for the pro­vi­sion of ser­vices and con­tracts of care were in place, though some im­prove­ment was re­quired to en­sure that they set out the fees to be charged in line with the reg­u­la­tions.

The fire safety regis­ter and as­so­ci­ated records were main­tained and pre­cau­tions against the risk of fire were in place. Fire ser­vic­ing records and train­ing were up to date. How­ever, the drills did not in­clude night­time sce­nar­ios. More de­tailed records were re­quired fol­low­ing drills such as time taken to evac­u­ate a par­tic­u­lar zone.

St Colum­ban’s was only found to be non-com­pli­ant over reg­u­la­tions cov­er­ing records. The sam­ple of staff files re­viewed did not meet the re­quire­ments of the reg­u­la­tions. As­sur­ance was not avail­able that Garda vet­ting was in place for all staff as the nec­es­sary doc­u­men­ta­tion was not on site.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Ireland

© PressReader. All rights reserved.