Dale Mount

Updated 18 July 2018

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 27 June 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and one 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.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the previous inspection report and notifications about important events that had taken place in the service which the provider is required to tell us by law. We used this information to help us plan our inspection.

We sought feedback from Healthwatch, relevant health and social care professionals and staff from the local authority on their experience of the service. Healthwatch are an independent organisation who work to make local services better by listening to people’s views and sharing them with people who can influence change. We also spoke to one health and social care professional who was visiting the service at the time of the inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with six people who lived at the service and observed the interaction between people and staff in the communal areas. We spoke with three relatives of people, to gain their views and experiences. We looked at three people's care plans and the recruitment records of three staff employed at the service.

We spoke with the registered manager, the activity coordinator a cook and two other members of staff. We viewed a range of policies, medicines management, complaints and compliments, meetings minutes, health and safety assessments, accidents and incidents logs. We also looked at what actions the provider had taken to improve the quality of the service.

Updated 18 July 2018

The inspection took place on 27 June 2018 and was unannounced.

Dale Mount is a ‘care home’ for up to 13 older people or people living with dementia. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

There were 13 people living at the service at the time of our inspection. The service was set on a large site together with Dale Lodge which is another care service run by the provider.

At our last inspection on 6 February 2017 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

A registered manager continued to be employed at the service. 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 continued to be sufficient numbers of staff who had the skills and knowledge they needed to support people living at the service. Staff were appropriately supervised. New staff had been recruited safely and pre-employment checks had been carried out.

People continued to be protected from abuse. Staff understood how to identify and report concerns. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines when they needed them. Risks were assessed and there were actions in place to minimise risk and keep people safe.

Peoples’ care met their needs. Care plans continued to accurately reflect people’s needs and included information on their religious, sexuality and cultural needs. 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 support this practice. Staff were aware of people’s decisions and respected their choices.

The service continued to support people to maintain their health and wellbeing. People confirmed that they had access to healthcare services. People were supported to maintain their weight and received appropriate support with staying hydrated.

People were treated with respect, kindness and compassion. People’s privacy was respected and they were supported to lead dignified lives. People were supported to maintain their independence. People were encouraged to express their views and were listened to. There were systems in place to seek feedback from people, relatives and community professionals to improve the service and feedback was listened to.

The service was clean and the environment pleasant and welcoming. The environment had been adapted to meet people’s individual needs. Staff were aware of infection control and the appropriate actions had been taken to protect people.

Staff, relatives and community health and social care professionals told us the service was well-led. The service was regularly audited to identify where improvements were needed and actions were taken.

Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns and incidents were recorded, investigated and acted upon. Lessons learnt were shared and trends were analysed. The service worked in partnership with other agencies to develop and share best practice.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.