• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Roman Wharf Nursing Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

126 Carholme Road, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, LN1 1SP (01522) 513202

Provided and run by:
Carecall Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile
Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

7 February 2017

During a routine inspection

We inspected Harvest House on 7 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced.

Harvest House provides accommodation for up to 22 older people who need personal or nursing care. Some people who live in the home experience memory loss associated with conditions such as dementia. At the time of the inspection 22 people were living in the home.

At our comprehensive inspection on 22 and 23 December 2015 there were three breaches of legal requirements related to the deployment of staff within the home, management of medicines and monitoring the quality of the services provided. At our focused inspection on 8 June 2016 we found that the registered provider had taken appropriate actions to ensure they met the legal requirements. At this inspection we found they had maintained the improvements they had made.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered

necessary to restrict their freedom in some way, usually to protect themselves. In relation to this the manager and staff had ensured people’s rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. They had also taken necessary steps to ensure people only received lawful care that protected their rights.

People were safe living in the home and staff knew how to respond to any concerns that may arise so that people were kept safe from abuse. Risk assessments were in place and regularly reviewed.

There were enough staff on duty to provide people with the support they needed and background checks had been carried out before new staff were appointed.

Staff were trained and supported to understand people’s needs and provide their care in the right way. People received a varied diet that took account of their nutritional needs and preferences. People were provided with all of the assistance they needed to access appropriate healthcare services.

People were treated in a kind and caring way. Their rights to privacy were upheld and their dignity was promoted.

Care plans reflected people’s needs and preferences and staff followed the care plans when providing practical assistance. People who became distressed were provided with individual reassurance and support.

People were encouraged to engage in meaningful activities and social events. There was a system in place to manage and resolve complaints.

The home was run in an open and inclusive manner and there were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the services people received. A registered manager was not in place at the time of the inspection. The registered provider’s area manager was acting as the home manager. Throughout this report we refer to this person as ‘the manager’. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

8 June 2016

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We previously carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 22 and 23 December 2015. During this inspection we found that the provider was not meeting the standards we expected and there were breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because the systems in place to deploy staff within the home, manage medicines and monitor the quality of the service were not effective. After the inspection the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches.

We undertook this focused inspection on 8 June 2016 in order to check whether the provider had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met the legal requirements. At this inspection we found that the provider had made improvements in all of the areas we had identified.

This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Harvest House Nursing Home on our website www.cqc.org.uk .

Harvest House Nursing Home provides accommodation for up to 22 older people who need personal or nursing care, some of whom experience memory loss associated with conditions such as dementia. At the time of our inspection 20 people were living in the home.

There were appropriate arrangements in place to ensure people’s medicines were ordered in a timely manner and were available when they needed to take them. People received their medicines at the times prescribed for them and medicine administration records were completed appropriately

The provider had made improvements to the way in which the registered manager and staff were deployed within the home. The registered manager had increased time to carry out their management duties and provide support for staff.

The provider had systems in place to identify shortfalls in the quality of services provided and plan for continuous improvement within the home. Regular monitoring of staffing levels took place and quality audits were carried out.

22 and 23 December 2015

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced inspection of Harvest House on 22 and 23 December 2015. The last comprehensive inspection took place on 13 May 2013 during which we found the provider was compliant with the outcomes we assessed.

Harvest House provides accommodation for up to 22 older people who need personal or nursing care, some of whom experience memory loss associated with conditions such as dementia. At the time of our inspection 19 people were living in the home, 18 of whom lived there on a permanent basis.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

At this inspection we found three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The registered persons had not provided or deployed enough staff with the correct skills to enable people to have all of their care needs met safely, consistently and promptly. The arrangements for people to receive their medicines in a safe and timely manner were not always robust. Systems in place for checking the quality of the services people received were not robust enough to ensure that shortfalls were always identified and managed promptly. You can see what action we told the registered persons to take in relation to each of these breaches of the regulations at the end of the full version of this report.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered necessary to restrict their freedom in some way, always to protect themselves. At the time of the inspection one person who used the home had their freedom restricted in order to keep them safe and three people were awaiting the outcomes of their assessments for a DoLS authorisation. The registered persons had acted in accordance with the MCA and DoLS guidance to ensure people’s rights were protected. However people’s personal records did not always reflect the actions taken to support them and some records were not easily accessible for staff to refer to.

People were treated in a kind and caring manner and their privacy and dignity were maintained. Their choices and preferences were respected and they were supported to make their own decisions whenever they could do so. A range of group social activities were available, however the venue and activities were not always suitable for some people to join in with.

People had access to a range of healthcare services and were supported to enjoy a varied diet in order to help them stay healthy. There was also a range of equipment available to meet their needs and encourage independence. However, care plans did not always reflect up to date information about people’s needs.

Staff were recruited appropriately in order to ensure they were suitable to work within the home. They were provided with training to develop their knowledge and skills. Staff understood people’s needs and responded promptly to help relieve any distress or anxiety. They knew how to report any concerns they might have in regard to people’s welfare.

The registered manager was supportive of people who lived in the home and the staff who worked there. They listened to what people had to say and took action to address any issues they had.

19 December 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

We conducted this inspection in response to concerns we had received about the care and welfare of people living at Harvest House. Prior to undertaking the visit we reviewed all the information we had received about the service and spoke with the local authority adult social care team. We also conducted a partial tour of the home and saw people in communal areas and in their own rooms.

During the course of the visit we looked at records, spoke with two people who lived at Harvest House and with two relatives of people who lived at the home together with five carers and the registered manager. We also observed the interaction between staff and the people they cared for.

One relative told us, "Honest mate, I come every day to see (my relative). It's absolutely marvellous. (My relative) is always clean and dry and always has clean clothes on. Honestly I can't fault it. If there was anything amiss I would see it, not just for my own relative you understand."

We found that people were well cared for and that appropriate measures were in place to ensure that where they required support to mobilise, it was recorded and staff were instructed what methods they were to use to help and support the person.

Staff were considerate and patient and displayed values appropriate to them dealing with people who had conditions related to older age, such as dementia.

We found that people were given sufficient food and drink to meet their individual requirements and where they could not eat and drink independently staff acted sympathetically when they supported them and recorded their food and fluid intake.

13 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us reach a judgement on the quality of service provision. These included talking with three people who used the service and one visitor to the home. We also spoke with the registered manager, a nurse, care staff, the cook, the house keeper and the provider's health and safety advisor.

We also looked at records. These included care plans and information about how the service was managed. We undertook a tour of the building and observed the interactions between care staff and people residing at the home.

We found that people were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink in sufficient quantities to meet their individual needs and preferences. One person we spoke with told us, 'The food is brilliant. You can have as much as you want.' A visitor to the home told us, '(my relative) is so much better now than when they were discharged from hospital. They have even put on some weight. They are far healthier.'

We saw that the building was in need of re-decoration and refurbishment but we were aware that plans had been approved to extend the home and re-locate the existing people into the new building whilst the older part of the home was re-furbished.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service.

8 January 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an inspection of Harvest House to follow up an area of non-compliance identified in a previous inspection. We reviewed the evidence that demonstrated the provider's compliance in this area.

We reviewed all the information that the provider had sent us, visited the premises and talked with the registered manager.

We saw that the provider had taken the appropriate measures to meet the essential standards of care for people who used the service provided at Harvest House.

21 August 2012

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of the people who used the service. This was because some of them had complex needs which meant that they were not able to tell us about their experiences. We spoke with two people who lived at Harvest House.

We looked at records, including personal care plans. We spoke to the manager and staff who were supporting people and we observed how they provided that support. We also spoke with two relatives and two professional people who were visiting the home.

One relative told us that, 'When dad was alive he used to come here and have dinner with mum. I can't fault the place, it's brilliant. If it wasn't she wouldn't be here.' Another relative said, 'Mum moving here has been a positive experience for her. She is more responsive, eats better and is well cared for.'

3 November 2011

During a routine inspection

We visited the service on 03 November 2011. We spoke with 3 people who told us that they were happy living at Harvest House. One person told us that they had lived there for four years and would never want to move.

All the people we spoke with told us there were always plenty of staff on duty who took time to talk with them if they were worried about anything.

One person told us 'The staff are excellent. The care I receive is wonderful, as is the food. There is always plenty of good, home cooked food.'

We observed that people seemed very relaxed and content and this was confirmed by those we spoke with.

A relative told us that they were always made welcome and staff kept them informed about their relative. 'My relative seems to be content. They never complain about anything and always look clean and smart.'