Archived: St Mark's Care Home

Updated 14 October 2016

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 inspection took place on 1 September 2016 and was unannounced. This meant the registered provider and staff did not know we would be visiting. The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We reviewed information we held about the service, including the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales.

The registered provider completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We contacted the commissioners of the relevant local authorities who worked with the service to gain their views of the care provided by St Mark’s Care Home. Details of the feedback received are contained in the full version of this report.

During the inspection we spoke with four people who used the service and six relatives. People using the service were not always able to share their experiences with us so we carried out observations using the short observational framework for inspections (SOFI). SOFI is a tool used to capture the experiences of people who use services who may not be able to express this for themselves.

We looked at three care plans, medicine administration records (MARs) and handover sheets. We spoke with seven members of staff, including the manager, nursing and care staff, kitchen, maintenance and housekeeping staff. We looked at four staff files, which included recruitment records, as well as other records involved in running the service.

Updated 14 October 2016

This inspection took place on 1 September 2016 and was unannounced. This meant the registered provider and staff did not know we would be visiting. The service was last inspected in January 2014 and was meeting the regulations we inspected at that time.

St Mark's Care Home is a purpose built home situated in Stockton on Tees. It accommodates people over two floors and has communal dining areas and lounges. There are surrounding gardens and onsite parking available to the rear of the property. It is registered to provide accommodation and nursing and personal care for up to 39 people. At the time of our inspection 30 people were using the service.

There was a manager in place who was in the process of applying to be 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.

Risks to people using the service were assessed and plans put in place to reduce the chances of them occurring. The premises and equipment were regularly reviewed to ensure they were safe for people to use. Accidents and incidents were monitored to see if improvements could be made to keep people safe. Plans were in place to provide a continuity of care in emergency situations.

Medicines were managed safely. Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place to help protect people from abuse. The manager monitored staffing levels to ensure they were sufficient to support people safely. Recruitment procedures were in place to minimise the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.

Staff received the training they needed to support people effectively and were supported through regular supervisions. Staff worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, but the registered provider’s paperwork was not always effective at identifying people’s capacity to make decisions. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and to access healthcare professionals to maintain and promote their health.

People and their relatives spoke positively about staff at the service, describing them as kind and caring. Support was delivered in a kind and caring way. Staff stopped and talked with people as they moved around the building, which helped to create a homely atmosphere. People were treated with dignity and respect.

Advocacy services were advertised in communal areas throughout the service, and the manager told us how people would be supported to access these if needed. Procedures were in place to provide end of life care where needed.

Care was person-centred and based on people’s assessed needs and preferences. Care plans were detailed and contained information on how people wanted to be supported. The staff team was very reflective and all looked at how they could tailor their practice to ensure the care delivered was completely person-centred.

People were supported to access activities they enjoyed and procedures were in place to investigate and respond to complaints.

Staff spoke positively about the culture and values of the service. The service had a clear management structure in place, led by an effective manager who understood the aims of the service and made appropriate notifications to CQC.

The manager carried out a number of quality assurance checks to monitor and improve standards at the service. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives through monthly meetings.