Archived: Galtee More Rest Home

Updated 21 March 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a comprehensive inspection. The inspection took place on 27 February 2018 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors.

We reviewed the information we held about the service before we carried out the visit. We collated information we had about the home. Prior to the inspection the registered provider had submitted a Provider Information Return (PIR) to us. The PIR is a document the registered provider is required to submit to us which provides key information about the service, and tells us what the provider considers the service does well and details any improvements they intend to make. We contacted the local authority commissioning team to gather their opinion of the service.

During the inspection we were able to speak with eight people who lived at Galtee More. We spoke with two staff, including the registered manager, the registered provider and a visiting support worker.

We looked at the care records for four people, as well as medication records, four staff recruitment files and other records relevant to the quality monitoring of the service. These included safety audits and quality audits. We undertook general observations and looked round the home.

Updated 21 March 2018

The inspection took place on 27 February 2018 and was unannounced. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question, is it safe? to at least good.”

Galtee More provides accommodation for people with a learning disability who require support with personal care. There were 11 people living in the home at the time of our inspection. There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

Galtee More accommodates 15 people in one building. Due to its layout the building does not have a passenger lift. There is ramp access to the front of the home. Bedrooms are situated over four floors. Most bedrooms are of single occupancy, some with en-suite facilities. There is a walk in bath and a shower room available for use. The home is within walking distance of the town centre and just off the promenade. Transport links to nearby towns are within easy reach.

Galtee More is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

“The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy. At Galtee More many of the people living in the home have lived there together for over 12 years, some as many as 30 years. Galtee More is their home. They access their community and its facilities through socialising, activities and work/volunteering opportunities. People are very much a part of the community. Some people have family members and friends who live locally and visit them.

Risk assessments had been undertaken to support people safely and in accordance with their individual needs. They were regularly updated to reflect any changes in people's needs.

Medicines were safely stored and administered in accordance with best practice. Staff were trained in the administration of medication. The records that we saw indicated that medicines were administered correctly and were subject to regular audit.

The registered provider had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. There were enough staff on duty to provide support to people living in the home.

Staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and were aware of the action they would take to ensure actual or potential harm was reported.

Safety checks of the environment and equipment were completed regularly. The home was odour free, clean and hygienic.

Staff were trained and supported by the service to ensure that they had the right skills and knowledge. They had completed a range of training courses relevant to the needs of people living at the home. We saw that staff received training regularly and that this was up to date.

Staff spoke positively about support they received from the registered manager and the registered provider. Staff we spoke with confirmed they had completed a period of induction when they commenced their employment, which included a number of ‘shadow shifts’. This enabled them to familiarise themselves with the people who lived in the home and their support needs. From the records we looked at we saw that staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals.

The service operated in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were able to make decisions regarding day to day choices. People living at Galtee More were able to consent to their care and support on a day to day basis. This was recorded in their care records.

People were supported to maintain good health in conjunction with a range of community healthcare services. We saw regular appointments were made with GPs, dentists and community nurses. People had up to date healthcare records and health passports which contained important information for healthcare professionals such as people’s support needs and communication needs.

People were supported to eat and drink and maintain a healthy diet in accordance with their individual requirements. Some people had specific dietary requirements because of diabetes. We checked with them to ensure they were supported to enjoy a health and varied diet. They confirmed they did.

Galtee More was accessible throughout via stairs. There was no passenger lift due to the layout of the building. There were two bedrooms and a bathroom on the ground floor. Bathrooms had been adapted to meet the needs of people living there.

People were treated with respect and kindness by staff. We observed positive relationships between people and the staff, including the registered manager. There was plenty of chatter and laughter. Staff supported people to maintain their privacy and dignity in all aspects of care.

People were encouraged to express their views and were actively involved in decisions about their care. Weekly meetings were held where decisions were made mainly regarding meals and activities.

Care plans were written for the individual and informed staff of people's preferences and wishes which were supported. Each record contained extensive information about people's personal history, family, care needs and preferences, as well as information which gave a ‘snap shot’ of the person’s likes and dislikes.

People enjoyed a range of activities both in the home and in the local community. Some people volunteered for local charities.

Staff recognised the need to communicate with people on an individual basis. Information was provided through face to face conversations. We observed staff using language which was simplified and repeated for some people to aid their understanding.

A complaints policy was in place and displayed in the home. People did not have any complaints about the service they received.

Quality assurance and governance systems were in place to help the registered manager and registered provider to monitor standards and drive forward improvements.

Feedback was sought regularly from people living in the home, their relatives and staff to ensure standards were being maintained.

The registered manager and registered provider met their legal requirements with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). They promoted a person centred and transparent culture in the home.