• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Pickering House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Ridgeway Road, Dorking, Surrey, RH4 3AY (01306) 888077

Provided and run by:
Journalists Charity

All Inspections

23 January 2017

During a routine inspection

The Journalists’ Charity provides a service to people who either worked in journalism or have been connected to journalism in the past. Pickering House is a home providing accommodation for up to 20 persons who require nursing or personal care, some of whom may have dementia. At the time of our inspection 15 people lived here.

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.

People told us they were happy living here. One person said, “The staff and manager are very good. I can have conversations with them about current affairs. All the staff have a very good grasp of English.” Another person said, “I feel that I am well cared for here.” Staff were happy in their work and proud of the job they do.

Staff recruitment procedures were safe to ensure staff were suitable to support people in the home. The provider had carried out appropriate recruitment checks before staff commenced employment, such as eligibility to work in the UK and criminal records checks. Staff understood their duty should they suspect abuse was taking place, including the agencies that needed to be notified, such as the local authority safeguarding team or the police.

People were safe at Pickering House because there were sufficient numbers of staff who were appropriately deployed and trained to meet the needs of people.

Risks of harm to people had been identified and clear plans and guidelines for staff to follow were in place to minimise these risks. In the event of an emergency people were protected because there were clear procedures in place to evacuate the building. Each person had a plan which detailed the support they needed to get safely out of the building in an emergency.

Staff received a comprehensive induction and on-going training, tailored to the needs of the people they supported. Staff received regular support in the form of annual appraisals and formal supervision to ensure they gave a good standard of safe care and support.

Staff managed people’s medicines in a safe way and were trained in the safe administration of medicines. People received their medicines when they needed them.

Where people did not have the capacity to understand or consent to a decision the provider had followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). An appropriate assessment of people’s ability to make decisions for themselves had been completed. Where people’s liberty may be restricted to keep them safe, the provider had followed the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure the person’s rights were protected.

People had enough to eat and drink to maintain good health, and received support from staff where a need had been identified. People’s individual dietary requirements where met.

People were supported to maintain good health as they had access to relevant healthcare professionals when they needed them. People’s health was seen to improve due to the care and support staff gave.

The staff were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People received the care and support as detailed in their care plans. Care plans were based around the individual preferences of people as well as their medical needs. People and relatives were involved in reviews of care to ensure it was of a good standard and meeting the person’s needs.

People had access to a wide range of activities that met their needs. Activities were available seven days a week to stimulate people and enable them to follow hobbies and interests.

People knew how to make a complaint. No complaints had been received in the last 12 months. Feedback from people was listened to and used to make positive changes to the service they received. Staff knew how to respond to a complaint should one be received.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care and support that people received. Quality assurance records were kept up to date to show that the provider had checked on important aspects of the management of the home. The registered manager had ensured that accurate records relating to the care and treatment of people and the overall management of the service were maintained.

People benefitted from living in a home with good leadership and a stable and dedicated staff team, so they knew the people who looked after them. Staff were very focused on ensuring that people received person centred care.

13 September 2013

During a routine inspection

During our visit we spoke with seven people who used the service and three relatives of people who used the service. We also spoke with six staff members and one health care professional. On the day of our inspection we also inspected the domiciliary care agency. We were told that the domiciliary care agency was providing personal care to three people and we spoke to one person who used the service.

People told us that they were happy living in Pickering house and Harmsworth house.

One person who used the service told us that 'Staff are very kind. I never have to wait for anything, and I enjoy my own company.'

We spent time observing how people spent their time, the support they received from staff and whether or not they had positive experiences. Our observations of staff practice showed that people were receiving effective, safe and appropriate care, which was designed to meet their specific needs.

We saw people felt comfortable in approaching staff and asking for assistance. People were relaxed and content in their surroundings. Staff engaged positively with people using the service to encourage them to communicate their consent, wishes and choices.

We found there was enough staff to meet people's needs and staff told us they received regular training and felt confident to carry out their roles and meet the needs of people using the service.

We found that the provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service they provided and we found that people were generally satisfied with the care and treatment they received.

14 March 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This was a follow-up inspection to check that the provider had completed work on compliance actions that had been set by CQC at their scheduled inspection on 18 September 2012. In this report the names of three registered managers appear; two of whom were not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their names appear because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

The provider sent us a detailed action plan detailing how they were going to meet the actions set.

We spoke with two people who used the service. Their comments included 'I am happy here' and 'The care staff are superb; new staff fit in with the ethos of the place'.

People told us that they or their representative had been involved in a recent review of their care needs. They also told us that they had consented to the care and treatment that they received.

19 September 2012

During a routine inspection

People who used the service told us that they liked living in Pickering House. They told us the home was 'comfortable, a home from home'. They went onto tell us that they had a healthy and nutritious diet and were able to choose what they wanted to eat.

People who used the service told us that the staff were 'fantastic' and 'absolutely wonderful, caring, they're like our extended family'. They told us that their care and treatment needs were being met. They also told us that they were treated with dignity and respect and felt secure in the home.

30 December 2010 and 1 February 2011

During a routine inspection

We spoke in detail to three people who use the service and they were very complimentary about the service and told us the staff were "wonderful".

Some people told us they were aware of their care plan but did not recall being asked to sign it.

Nine people who use the service and a visitor spoke positively and appreciatively about the quality of the meals available. People said they were asked each day to make their meal choices for the following day.

One person using the service told us they felt their health had improved since they had moved to the home.

All the people we talked to said that they would speak to the person in charge if they were worried or concerned about anything, and they felt confident they would be listened to and something would be done if necessary.

People who use the service said the home is maintained to a high standard and that they were very happy with their bedrooms. They had been able to bring their own things in to personalise their rooms, including furniture, ornaments, pictures and TV's.

The staff were highly praised by people who use the service, and by their representatives, who all said that staff were available when needed and when the call bell was used.