You are here

Archived: Carlton Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

This inspection took place on 24 October 2014 and was unannounced. When we last inspected the service in November 2013. The provider was meeting all expectations.

Carlton Care Home provides accommodation and nursing for up to 29 people who have nursing or dementia care needs. There were 25 people living in the home at the time of our inspection.

The manager was present on the day of our visit. 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.

We found staff were knowledgeable in how to safeguard people from abuse. They had attended relevant training, which helped them protect people from abuse.

We found the provider had a robust recruitment process to ensure they employed qualified and skilled staff to meet people’s needs.

People received their medicines as prescribed and in a safe way. Relevant records were completed and staff had attended appropriate training to ensure medicines were administered safely.

We found staff were aware of the mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant people would not be restricted without the appropriate safeguards being in place. We found the provider made suitable arrangements to ensure people who lacked the capacity were appropriate assessed. We saw mental capacity assessments had been implemented for all the people living in the home.

Risk assessments had taken place to ensure people’s needs were met. We saw sufficient staff on duty at the time of our inspection.

People we spoke with described ways in which their needs were met by knowledgeable staff who understood their individual care needs. Staff told us they completed an appropriate induction when they first started work at the home. We saw relevant training had been undertaken by all staff to ensure people were cared for by suitably skilled and qualified staff.

People told us they felt their privacy and dignity were respected. We saw staff interacting with people and they were caring for people in a calm and respectful manner. People’s needs were assessed and monitored to ensure they maintained good health and wellbeing. The provider consulted other professionals and followed advice when required to ensure people’s changing needs were met.

People received suitable support to help them eat and drink independently. We saw people received sufficient to eat and drink. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary requirements to ensure they received a nutritional diet.

People were encouraged to be involved with their care and how the home was run. Staff had good knowledge about people and what was important to them. They were able to describe individual’s preferences, wishes and aspirations. Complaints and concerns were dealt with in a timely manner. People we spoke with told us they were able to raise concerns and knew who they should raise them with.

We found the manager was open and approachable. They had appropriate systems in place to gather, record and evaluate information about the quality of the service. The manager had a good relationship with other healthcare professionals. When we spoke with other healthcare professional they told us they had a good positive relationship with the manager and there were no concerns with the care that was given.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

The service was safe.

People felt safe with the staff who cared for them and were protected from abuse. Staff were knowledgeable of how to recognise the signs of abuse.

People were able to take informed risks as the service managed potential risks and people received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

There were sufficient staff on each shift. Staffing levels were assessed and monitored to ensure people needs were met.

There were plans in place for the provider to respond in an emergency to ensure people’s health and safety.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

The service was effective.

People’s needs were met by staff who had appropriate skills and knowledge.

The manager was following the requirements set out for the MCA and DOLs and acted legally in people’s best interests if they did not have the mental capacity for particular decisions.

People were supported to have a balanced diet that promoted healthy eating and drinking.

People received relevant health services when their needs changed.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and compassion on a daily basis.

People had access to advocacy services and relevant information, so they could make informed choices and be fully supported to make the right choice for them.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

The service was responsive.

People were supported to follow their individual interests and social activities.

People were encouraged to share their experiences and raise concerns if needed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 October 2015

The service was well led.

People were encouraged to be actively involved with the service.

The manager was open and approachable.

The provider had a system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.