Karen, conversation now…, conversely or otherwise …
Agreed, Karen:
A care home can be a ‘rubbish’ care home as ’experienced’ by any one of us or more importantly by any one of our relatives, even though no major issues are reported on CSCI inspection reports for the simple reason that any single CSCI report may be past its “use-by-date”. Things can change almost overnight, as some of us have experienced. (I feel almost as if I am apologising for CSCI now, which is not my intention!)
Change of manager; change of support staff; change of cleaning contract; change of ‘chef’; admission of new residents sometimes even – those ‘change factors’ all have an influence on the quality of the experience. And who is there to help (I nearly wrote ‘God help’ but even s/he can’t!!) the poor s.ds who just happen to arrive in the midst of any number or combination of those changes.
CSCI may not reappear to inspect for 3 years, especially if that last inspection revealed ‘no major issues’. (Afterthought: how do we ever know the standing of that CSCI inspection? Why was it carried out ‘announced’ or ‘unannounced’? Who decided that it should be announced or unannounced? If announced, how much notice was given? Was it carried out by a ‘novice’ or by an ‘experienced’ CSCI inspector? Have experience of ‘novice’ so no more comment now on that one.)
You sadly came into close contact with a care home and its inspection report that was long past its sell-by date, let alone its use-by-date. And I know it may be the only ‘compromised’ one that you came by – but one is sometimes all it takes. In fact, one can be more than it takes to demolish all that you have worked for and achieved over years.
And it is just that ‘one’ that just should not happen.
I remain convinced that it can be avoided by those in a position to do something about it: namely, in the first place the Care Home Provider. Often, too often, the Care Home Provider is the ‘faceless’ but the responsible one.
They too are supposed to visit, to inspect, to evaluate the service they are providing, to evaluate their appointed Manager in situ, the staff s/he employs, the systems in place. But how often is the Care Home Provider ever mentioned by name when things go wrong? How often is the Care Home Provider mentioned when things go well?
[I know it is not allowed on TP, but perhaps there is a need to set up a network of communication somehow, somewhere, someway, communication in particular from ‘us’ to ‘those’ who might be able to take up the cause on behalf of many of us. For all I know, the provider of your ‘compromised’ care home may well be the same provider of my own ‘compromised’ care home, even though we live hundreds of miles apart from each other, as the crow flies, from NW to SE.]
Equally conversationally:
A care home can be a gleaming shining beacon - like the one that you came by, thank goodness – without having a similarly shining inspection report. And the Care Home Provider of your shining beacon may be the same provider of ‘A N Other’s’ shining beacon care home.
So, again, perhaps there needs to be an ‘invisible’ communication network, via ‘ somewhere’, via TP or via ‘elsewhere’, to a central ‘body’ who can do something really positive with that information, to praise, to applaud, to celebrate the excellence of any particular care home provider, that excellence we are all seeking for our relatives. It would not need to be broadcast on TP, but merely submitted to a ‘body’ that cares enough to do something with the gathered information.
It might be a case of ‘fast hand-clap applaud’ and ‘slow hand-clap shame’ – but not on this forum. That would be neither acceptable, nor sensible.
To converse further about paperwork:
It is not always the ‘visible’ accessible-on-the-day-of-the-inspection paperwork that is of most importance. If important paperwork is … just not there, and is totally …. absent …. then someone should have noticed. Who? CSCI? Care Home Provider? Social Services? Surely the onus should not be on us!
But that ‘absent, invisible system’ may be all that it takes to … … … … do damage.
Apologies for longish conversation, Karen! But thanks for the opportunity.