Archived: Highroyd Care Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives and the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.

Is the service safe?

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continuously improve.

When people were identified as being at risk, their care plans showed the actions that would be required to manage these risks. These included the provision of specialist equipment such as hoists and walking aids.

The service had policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provider knew how to request an assessment if this was required. Staff received safeguarding and Mental Capacity Act training. This meant people would be safeguarded as required.

There were sufficient care staff to respond to people's health and welfare needs.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them. From speaking with staff they were able to demonstrate a good understanding of people's care and support needs.

Suitable arrangements were in place for staff to receive updated training to ensure they had the skills, knowledge and experience to meet the needs of people who used the service. This ensured that the outcomes for people would continue to improve.

There was a resident's forum at the home, which met regularly and where people had the opportunity to discuss things that affected the running of the home. Relatives were encouraged to be as involved as much as they wanted to be and had been invited to the meetings held at the home.

People who used the service were safe because the provider had in place effective recruitment and selection procedures.

Is the service caring?

We saw staff were attentive and respectful when speaking with or supporting people. The home had a relaxed and comfortable atmosphere. Interaction between people who used the service was harm and good humoured. One person we spoke with told us said 'The staff here are lovely and they look after me.'

People looked well cared for and we observed good care practices taking place. We observed the lunchtime experience and saw that staff were calm and unhurried and they spent time with people.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs were assessed and records we looked at showed they received specialist support services they needed.

People's preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

People we spoke with and their relatives knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy.

When we visited we saw a staff team that acted professionally and responded appropriately to people's care needs. People were being assisted promptly and we saw the staff had time to engage with people.

The service carried out an annual satisfaction survey and the results of the survey were complementary about the support and care people received.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance system, and records showed that identified problems had been addressed promptly. As a result we could see that the quality of the service was continuously improving.

Staff we spoke with were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They told us the manager was very supportive and promoted positive team working.

The manager spoke passionately about the care and support the staff team offered to people who used the service. The manager had kept their knowledge and skills up to date and had introduced a different way of working that supported people with dementia in a very positive way. The staff team had responded well to this change.

Effective management systems were in place to promote and safeguard people's safety and welfare. Health and safety records and peoples care records were up to date and had been reviewed regularly.

We spoke to three people who lived in the home. One person said 'I am being looked after very well, staff are very nice'. Another person said 'Staff are very kind'.

We spoke to three people who used the service, six visitors and one visiting healthcare professional. We observed the care and treatment of people who lived in the home.

One visitor said 'She has only been in here a few weeks but we think she is well looked after, she loves the food here. The staff are always very friendly'.

We saw that people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned in line with their individual care plan. Care plans had information on assessments being carried out in areas such as personal care, mobility, pressure area care and nutrition. Risk assessment were in place and covered areas such as falls, tissue viability and nutrition. We saw that care records recorded people's weight and where people had experienced weight loss referrals were made to the GP.

All of the staff we spoke to during our visit were familiar with safeguarding procedures. When asked what constituted abuse one member of staff said 'It can be anything like verbal, financial or sexual abuse'. The staff member said she had never experienced any abusive behaviour towards people but if she did she would report it immediately to the senior care staff or the manager.

We saw that safeguarding incidents had been responded to in line with the safeguarding policy and that notifications had been made to CQC.

We asked how the provider monitored the quality of the care delivered. We saw that monthly audits were carried out by the home owner and the manager.

These covered areas such as medication, care plans and the environment in which people lived. We saw that the home owner spoke to people who used the service and members of staff to get their views.

We saw that regular meetings were held with 'Friends of Highroyd Care Home'. This meeting was chaired by a relative of someone who lived in the home. The meeting was held to enhance the quality of life for people who used the service by organising activities such as trips, visits, entertainment and activities. One the day of the inspection a visit had been arranged to show people who used the service a number of wild life birds.

We saw that surveys were carried out with people who used the service, and professional staff and visitors. Results from the surveys identified high levels of satisfaction with the service.

The home was clean and had a welcoming atmosphere. We observed there were enough staff on duty to provide the support and care people required. Two members of staff told us they had worked at the home for over 10 years and enjoyed their job. They also told us they got regular training.