You are here

Charnwood Park Residential Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

We inspected the service on 7 January 2016

Charnwood Park Residential Home provides accommodation for up to 11 older people with physical difficulties and sensory impairments. There were 11 people using the service on the day of our inspection.

There was 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 told us they felt safe and that there were enough staff available to meet their needs. There was a recruitment policy in place which the registered manager followed. We found that all the required pre-employment checks were being carried out before staff were to commence work.

Risks were assessed and managed to protect people from harm. Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people who used the service. People received their medicines as required and medicines were managed and administered safely.

People’s independence was promoted and staff encouraged people to make independent choices.. People remained part of the wider community if they wished to and they were supported to maintain links with people important to them.

People were supported to make decisions about the care they received. People’s opinions were sought and respected. The provider had considered their responsibility to meet the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was clear of their role in ensuring best interest decisions were made for people.

The registered manager had assessed the care needs of people using the service. Staff had a clear understanding of their role and how to support people who used the service as individuals.

Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and compassion. People enjoyed the meals provided and where they had dietary requirements, these were met. People were offered adequate drinks to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Systems were in place to monitor the health and wellbeing of people who used the service. People’s health needs were met and when necessary, outside health professionals were contacted for support.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager. The registered manager supervised staff and regularly checked their competency to carry out their role. People who used the service felt they could talk to the registered manager and had faith that they would address issues if required. Relatives found the registered manager to be approachable.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

The service was safe

People told us they felt safe and the staff team knew how to keep people safe from harm. Regular safety checks had been carried out on the environment and the equipment used for people’s care. People’s medicines were managed so that they received them safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

The service was effective

We saw that staff received appropriate training to enable them to meet the requirements of their role. The service catered for individual dietary needs and staff were aware of how to provide these. People told us that they enjoyed the food provided.

The provider had considered people’s capacity to make informed decisions around aspects of their care and sought their consent. Consideration had been given to the responsibility of the service to meet the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Caring

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

The service was caring

People were encouraged to make choices and independence was promoted. Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect.

There were no restrictions on visiting times which enabled relatives to maintain frequent contact with people.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

The service was responsive.

Feedback from people who used the service and visitors was actively sought. People were aware of the complaints procedure and felt able to raise any concerns.

Care plans contained information about people’s preferences and chosen routines. This included information about what was important to them, details of their life history and information about their hobbies and interests.

Well-led

Good

Updated 18 February 2016

Staff had a clear understanding of the aims and objectives of the service. Staff felt supported by the registered manager. People using the service felt able to contact the registered manager and discuss any issues with them.

The registered manager kept robust records to enable them to monitor the smooth running of the service.