You are here

Thurlaston Meadows Care Home Ltd Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 June 2016

The inspection took place on 17and 18 May 2016. The visit was unannounced on 17 May 2016 and we informed the provider we would return on 18 May 2016.

The Warwickshire Nursing and Residential Home provides accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 46 older people. The home provides care to people living with frailty due to older age or dementia and other health conditions. The home provides end of life nursing care to people. At the time of the inspection 36 people lived at the home and one person was having day care, but not living, at the home. Renovation building work on five unoccupied bedrooms was due to be completed in June 2016.

The home is required to have a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. At the time of this inspection the home had a registered manager in post.

At our previous inspection in September 2014, the provider was meeting the requirements of the regulations. Since our last inspection, numerous staffing changes had taken place and these included the appointment of a new manager in October 2015, who became registered with us in March 2016.

Staff were trained to protect people from avoidable harm and people felt safe living at the home. Staff knew how to respond to emergencies that might arise from time to time. People felt there were enough staff to meet their needs and that staff had the skills they needed. We found people had their prescribed medicines available to them and were supported by staff to take these as prescribed.

Staff undertook training to give them the skills and knowledge they needed and where staff did not follow this, poor practice was addressed by the manager. Staff worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People had choices about what they did and how they spent their time and were offered choices about food and drink.

People described staff as kind and caring and we observed some positive caring interactions that were person centred. People and their relatives felt involved in making decisions about their care and felt listened to. People told us they had no complaints about the service they received.

Systems were in place to assess the quality of the service provided but these had not always been effective in identifying where action was needed to make improvement. There had been numerous staffing challenges, which had left gaps in both the management structure and staff team. This had impacted on the manager’s time and overall management. The manager was aware of some issues that required improvement in the home and where some staff care practices needed to be improved upon.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 June 2016

The service was safe.

People felt safe living at the home and were protected from the risks of abuse by trained staff who knew how to raise any concerns they had to the manager. Staff knew how to keep people safe from harm and what equipment to use so that the risks of injury were minimised. People had their prescribed medicines available to them and were supported by staff to take them

Effective

Good

Updated 21 June 2016

The service was effective.

Staff worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act to gain consent from people before carrying out personal care tasks. The manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were offered choices and given the support they needed to eat and drink. People were supported to maintain their health and were referred to health professionals when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 June 2016

The service was caring.

People and their relatives told us that staff were kind and caring towards them or their family member and people were supported to express their views.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 June 2016

The service was responsive.

People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care which was personalised to them. People made choices about how they wished to spend their time and there were opportunities for people to pursue their hobbies, interests or engage in social interaction.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 21 June 2016

The service was not consistently well led.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided but these had not always been effective in identifying where action was needed to make improvement. There had been numerous staffing challenges, which had left gaps in both the management structure and staff team. This had impacted on the manager’s time and overall management. The manager shared with us areas they had identified as requiring improvement in the home that they planned to implement.