We carried out a review of the data available to us about Olivet on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Olivet, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ On their arrival at the home visitors were screened for symptoms of COVID-19. They were required to complete a lateral flow test to ensure their visit could take place safely in line with current guidance.
¿ People were supported to maintain contact with others who were important to them. A visiting pod had been created in May 2020 and was divided by a Perspex screen which meant people were able to see and talk to their visitors in a safe and comfortable environment.
¿ Christian faith was of paramount importance to people who lived at Olivet and they were supported to practice their religion in a variety of ways. People could join daily bible reading sessions and weekly religious services. This had a positive impact on people’s wellbeing.
¿ The frequency of cleaning at the home had increased. Touch points such as handrails were cleaned every two hours. This practice minimised the transmission of Covid-19.
This unannounced, comprehensive inspection took place on the 03 October 2018 with a returned announced visit made on the 04 October 2018. Olivet provides accommodation and support for up to 68 adults with nursing and personal care needs. The home comprised three units, Garden House for residential care, Magnolia for nursing care and Cedars for those living with dementia. At the time of our inspection visit 62 people were living there.
At our last inspection in July 2017, we rated the service requires improvement under the key questions ‘is the service effective and well led’. At this inspection we found there had been improvements made to support a rating of good.
Olivet is registered as a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were kept safe. Staff understood how to protect people from risk of harm. People's risks were assessed, monitored and managed to ensure they remained safe. Processes were in place to keep people safe in the event of an emergency such as a fire. People were protected by safe recruitment procedures and sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people's support needs. People received their medicines as required. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to hygiene and infection control.
People received effective support from staff that had the skills required to support them safely. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were encouraged to eat healthily. People had access to healthcare professionals when needed, in order to maintain their health and wellbeing.
Staff encouraged people's independence where practicably possible. People received a service that was caring and respected their privacy. People were supported by staff who knew them well.
People received a service that was responsive to their individual needs. Care plans were personalised and contained details about people's preferences and their routines. People were supported to pursue hobbies and activities that interested them and processes were in place to respond to any issues or complaints. Peoples’ faith was very important to them. This included their end of life (EOL) wishes which we saw were openly discussed between the person, family members and healthcare professionals. This meant that people’s EOL wishes were respected and fulfilled to the person’s individual preferences.
The service was well led, the registered manager understood their role and responsibilities and staff felt supported and listened to. People and staff were encouraged to give feedback and their views were acted on to enhance the quality of service provided to people. People and staff were complimentary about the leadership and management of the home and said the registered manager was friendly and approachable. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided to people and the provider worked in conjunction with other agencies to provide people with effective care.
Olivet Nursing Home provides accommodation and support for up to 68 people with nursing and personal care needs. The home comprised three units, Garden House for residential care, Magnolia for nursing care and Cedars for those living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 65 people living in the home.
There was a registered manager was 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.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. However, these had not always been consistently applied to ensure where shortfalls had been identified, were investigated thoroughly and appropriate action plans put into place to reduce risk of reoccurrences.
People received care and support from care staff that had effective skills to meet people’s needs, although some of the training for the nursing staff required updating. Staff received supervision and appraisals, providing them with the appropriate support to carry out their roles.
We saw staff treated people as individuals, offering them choices whenever they engaged with people. Staff sought people's consent for care and treatment and ensured people were supported to make as many decisions as possible. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make informed decisions about their care, relatives, friends and relevant professionals were involved in best interest's decision making. However, mental capacity assessments were not always up to date and consistently completed to clearly show what decisions people were being supported or asked to make in relation to their care. Applications had been submitted to deprive people of their liberty, in their best interest; therefore, the provider had acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People who lived at the home were kept safe. Staff were trained to identify signs of abuse and supported by the provider’s processes to keep people safe. Potential risks to people had been identified and appropriate measures had been put in place to reduce the risk of harm. People were supported by sufficient numbers of suitable staff that had been recruited safely. People received their medicines as prescribed.
People spoke positively about the choice of food available. Staff supported people who were living with dementia to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing in a caring and sensitive way. People were supported to access health care professionals to ensure that their health care needs would be continuously met.
People and relatives told us that staff were kind, caring and friendly and treated people with dignity and respect. The atmosphere around the home was warm and welcoming. People were relaxed and staff supported people in a dignified way. People and relatives told us they were well supported by staff and the management team and encouraged to maintain relationships that were important to people. People’s health care needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. Relatives told us the management team were good at keeping them informed about their family member’s care. People were supported by a dedicated activities team that provided numerous opportunities to optimise people’s social and stimulation requirements. People and their relatives told us they were confident that if they had any concerns or complaints they would be listened to and matters addressed quickly.
The management team had a number of systems to gain feedback from people living at the home, relatives and visitors. This included resident/relative meetings, satisfaction questionnaires, regular reviews and a suggestion box. People, their relatives and staff told us the home was well organised and ‘well-led.’
This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 8 and 9 April 2015. At the last inspection on 20 December 2013 we found that the provider was meeting the requirements of the Regulations we inspected.
Olivet Nursing Home is a residential care and nursing home providing accommodation for up to 68 older people. At the time of our visit 66 people were living there.
There was a registered manager was 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. The registered manager is shortly due to retire and a replacement has been recruited and currently completing their induction.
People we spoke to who lived at the home told us they felt safe and secure. However, not everyone who lived at the home could tell us about their experiences. A number of people had different ways of expressing their feelings. Although, their relatives were able to tell us they felt that people were kept safe. We saw good interactions between staff and people; they smiled often and looked happy. Staff all said they felt people were kept safe. The provider had processes and systems in place to keep people safe and protected them from the risk of harm.
People told us they received their medicines as prescribed and appropriate records were kept when medicines were administered by trained staff.
Risks to people had been assessed and appropriate well maintained equipment was available for staff to use.
Some people and relatives felt the provider did not have enough staff to cover for nights, illness and weekends, which they felt put additional pressure on the remaining staff. However, we found that there were enough staff to meet people’s identified needs because the provider ensured staff were recruited and trained to meet the care needs of people.
The provider was taking the correct action to protect people’s rights, and all staff were aware of how to fully protect the rights of people.
We saw that people were supported to have choices and received food and drink at regular times throughout the day. Staff supported people to eat their meals when needed.
People were supported to access other health care professionals to ensure that their health care needs were met.
People, relatives and health care professionals, told us the staff were very caring, friendly and treated people with kindness and respect. We saw staff were caring and helpful.
We found that people’s health care needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. We saw that people were involved in group or individual social activities to prevent them from being isolated.
People and most of their relatives told us they were confident that if they had any concerns or complaints, they would be listened to and the matters addressed quickly.
The provider had management systems to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided. This included gathering feedback from people who used the service and their relatives.
Some of the people who lived at the home had dementia care needs. People with dementia are not always able to tell us about their experiences so we looked at records relating to their care and observed staff caring for them. People told us and we saw that choices were offered and that people's views were sought and acted upon.
All staff spoken to was able to tell us about people's needs and records seen confirmed that staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for. We saw positive interactions between staff and people that lived at the home. One person said, 'Staff talk to me about my needs and my care plan.'
Systems were in place to ensure that people were safeguarded from harm. People told us that they did not have any concerns about the staff that provided their care and support. One person said, "I am safe and secure here; the staff are great."
There were systems in place to monitor how the home was run, to ensure people received a quality service.
Information was available in different formats, to support people using the service to complain or raise concerns if they wished to.
The eight people we spoke with told us they were comfortable living there and staff were kind and helped them. One person told us, "I have brought all my belongings that I need and they(staff) have set up the computer for me so I am really content'. Another person using the service told us, 'No concerns at all about the way I am looked after'.
A relative told us," I am very happy with the care provided to my relative, they are happy. Staff are helpful and I know everything there is to know about X's care'.
We saw that people were relaxed in their environment and that systems were in place to keep people safe from harm.
Staff received a range of training so that they had up to date knowledge and skills in order to support the people who lived in the home.
There were systems in place to monitor how the home was run and ensure people received a quality service.