You are here

Archived: Belton House Retirement Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

We inspected this service on 18 August 2016. The inspection was unannounced.

The service was last inspected on 23 February 2015. At that inspection we found that all areas required some improvements and there was a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We asked the provider to implement changes to ensure that they met the regulations. At this inspection we found that the necessary action had been completed and improvements had been made to improve the quality of the service that was provided.

Belton House Retirement Home provides accommodation for up to 22 older people, some of whom were living with dementia. On the day of our inspection there were eight people who lived at the service and nine people were staying for a short break.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People were protected from harm. People had told us at the last inspection visit that they felt safe and there were sufficient numbers of staff who were appropriately deployed. Risks associated with people's care were assessed and managed to eliminate or reduce any harm presented to people using the service.

All staff had received appropriate training that enabled them to meet the needs of people who used the service. People received their medicines as required and medicines were managed, stored and administered safely.

People were supported and encouraged to make decisions about the care and support they received. They had their mental capacity assessed where necessary to support people's dignity and independence. The provider was aware of their responsibility to meet the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People were offered and encouraged to participate in meaningful activities and to also follow their interests. People's chosen bath and shower preferences were supported and personal choices were fully detailed in care plans.

At our last inspection we found that while some systems were in place to monitor the service, these were not always effective. We found at this inspection that regular audits had been completed relating to all areas of the service and any actions needed had been taken promptly and these were then dated and signed on the records. The monitoring systems and follow up actions therefore meant that the service was no longer in breach of Regulation 10.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

The service was safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet the needs of people who used the service.

People who lived at the service had risk assessments completed and reviewed to support their safety.

Medicines were stored, handled and administered in a safe way and in line with current guidance.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

The service was effective.

All staff had undertaken training that enabled them to provide appropriate care and support.

Staff routinely assessed people's ability to make decisions about their care and support.

The service was working within the principals of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) .

People who required assistance with their meals, received support in a way that met their needs as assessed in their care plan.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

The service was caring.

People were routinely involved in making decisions about their care and support.

People's dignity was protected as arrangements for bathing and showering met individual needs and choices.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

The service was responsive.

People were offered and encouraged to undertake activities and to follow interests of their choice.

Well-led

Good

Updated 13 September 2016

The service was well led.

There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.