You are here

Homecroft Residential Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 9 February 2018

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 16 and 17 October 2017. At the last inspection in February 2015, the provider was rated as Good in each of the five key questions and the overall rating was ‘Good’. At this inspection we found some areas of concern where improvements were required.

Homecroft Residential Home is registered to provide accommodation with nursing and personal care for up to 23 people including older people, people living with dementia and people with mental health needs. On the day of the inspection there were 21 people living at the home.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

Management of risks, particularly in relation to people’s mobility was not consistently safe. Staff were aware of their responsibility to report any concerns about people’s safety and knew how to escalate any concerns to the relevant authorities. The provider carried out safe recruitment practice to ensure staff who supported people were safe to work with vulnerable adults. People received their medicines as prescribed and there were systems in place to ensure medicines were managed and stored safely.

People were supported by staff who received training and support to ensure they had the skills and knowledge required to support people. People were happy with the food and drink provided, although some people would have preferred a wider variety of meals. People were asked for their consent before care and support was provided. The provider carried out assessments of people’s capacity to make specific decisions. People were supported to access healthcare professionals when required and learning had taken place about staff responsiveness to concerns following a recent complaint.

People were supported by staff who they described as helpful and caring. People were encouraged to make their own decisions about their day to day care and support. Staff supported people with dignity and promoted their independence. Visitors felt welcomed at the home.

People were not always offered activities and pastimes that interested them. Consideration had not always been given to people’s individual needs and preferences. People were involved in the planning and review of their care. People and relatives knew how to complain if they were unhappy with the care they receive. The provider had a system in place to monitor and respond to complaints.

The provider did not have established systems to monitor the quality of care provided. Where required improvements were identified, actions had not always been taken to ensure people’s safety. Audits and oversight of care records had not identified the concerns identified at the inspection. People and relatives had been asked to give feedback on the service they received and staff felt the management team were approachable. The registered manager and provider had notified us of incidents and events as required by law.

During the inspection we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was not consistently safe.

Risks to people’s mobility had not always been sufficiently assessed or reviewed to ensure people received care that protected them from potential harm.

People felt safe and were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had been safely recruited.

People were supported by staff who knew how to identify signs of potential abuse and were aware of how to report any concerns.

People received their medicines as prescribed and systems to manage medicines were safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff received training relevant to their role, which benefited their understanding of people’s support needs.

People were asked for their consent before receiving care. People’s capacity to make specific decisions about their care and support had been assessed.

People were supported to access health care professionals when required and staff followed guidance from professionals to ensure people maintained their health.

Caring

Requires improvement

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was not always caring.

Systems and processes within the home did not always ensure people were cared for safely.

People were supported by staff who they described as caring and helpful.

Staff were aware of people’s preferences and people were supported to make decisions about their daily living.

Staff encouraged people to maintain their independence.

People were treated with dignity and staff ensure their privacy was respected.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was not always responsive.

People did not always receive support to take part in hobbies and pastimes that interested them.

People and their relatives knew how to complain if they were unhappy with the service they received and the provider had a system in place to manage and investigate complaints. However improvements were required to ensure people’s feedback was recorded and responded to promptly.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care and support.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was not consistently well-led.

Systems used to monitor the quality of care provided had not always been effective at identifying the issues found at our inspection.

Systems had not been established to effectively monitor the quality of care people received.

People had been asked to give their feedback about the care they received and actions had been taken in response.

The registered manager was present in the home on a daily basis and people and relatives knew who they were.

The provider had notified us of incidents and events as required by law.