Background to this inspection
Updated
4 December 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 inspection took place on 2 November 2018. One inspector carried out this unannounced inspection.
During the inspection, we spoke with two people. We also spoke with the provider and the deputy manager.
Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. 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 took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
We looked at care plans and associated records for two people and records relating to the management of the service. These included, the provider’s statement of purpose, accidents and incidents and quality assurance records. We also reviewed reports from quality assurance visits by the local authority.
The service was last inspected in August 2016 and was rated good.
Updated
4 December 2018
This unannounced inspection took place on 2 November 2018. One inspector carried out the inspection.
Mrs Evelyn Larmouth - 45 Westridge Road is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or 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.
Mrs Evelyn Larmouth - 45 Westridge Road is registered to accommodate up to three older people. People had their own bedroom with a private bathroom. People shared the rest of the family home with the provider, who also acts as the manager and lives at the property. The provider does not employ any other staff unless they go on holiday. There were two people living at the service at the time of inspection.
At our last inspection 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
The provider’s registration did not require the service to have a registered manager. The provider was the manager of the service, which was based at their family home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered providers and managers 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 service was a small, homely environment where people lived alongside the provider in their family home. The provider shared many aspects of their lives with people, including meal times, activities and social events. The provider encouraged people to remain active by supporting them out to take regular day trips out.
People were treated with dignity, kindness and respect. They carried out their daily routines according to their preference and at a pace which they were comfortable with.
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.
The environment was suitable for people’s needs. People decorated their rooms to their preference and had private bathroom and toilet facilities in their rooms.
People followed a diet that met their preference and dietary requirements. The provider cooked fresh food daily and people told us they enjoyed the meals offered.
The home was a clean and hygienic environment. The provider had received a 5-star food hygiene rating when inspected by The Food Standards Agency. This denotes a very good standard of hygiene.
The provider assessed people’s needs to help ensure they received appropriate care. People received their medicines as prescribed and had appropriate access to healthcare services when required. Where people required input from other stakeholders such as doctors, their recommendations were incorporated into people’s care plans.
Where people received care at the end of their lives, they were treated with empathy, respect and given compassionate care.
The provider and deputy manager had a comprehensive knowledge about people’s backgrounds, preferences and needs. The provider lived at the service and apart from the deputy manager, no other staff worked at the service on a regular basis. One additional member of staff was available in the absence of the provider. They had gone through appropriate recruitment checks to help ensure they were suitably skilled and experienced in their role.
The provider and deputy manager had accessed training relevant to their role, which hoped to promote the provision of effective care.
People were protected against risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risk of abuse and inappropriate care. There were systems in place to reflect on incidents to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. There was a complaints policy in place which detailed how complaints and feedback would be dealt with.
The provider understood their regulatory responsibilities and had made arrangements to display its inspection rating and notify CQC of significant events at the home.
The provider had a series of audits and checks in place which were effective in ensuring the environment was a safe place for people to live.