We carried out a review of the data available to us about Greville House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Greville House, you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Greville House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 22 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 25 people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
There were systems in place to monitor the service and gather feedback on people’s experiences.
However, these were not always robust. Some improvement was required in relation to recording and documentation of some people’s records and to some of the quality assurance systems.
People told us the registered manager and staff were kind and caring. They said they felt safe with their care staff and trusted them. Relatives were complimentary about the kindness of the staff.
Staff had been recruited safely and there were sufficient numbers of staff to support people. Staff were committed to delivering care that was personalised. Staff spoke enthusiastically about how they provided people with good quality, person-centred care. Staff turnover was low and people told us they were supported by staff who knew them well and met their needs. The service liaised with health and social care professionals.
People's needs were assessed, and these considered protected characteristics under the Equality Act. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People's dietary needs were met, and people had access to healthcare services where required.
People were supported by staff who were caring. People were involved in decisions around their care and were treated with dignity.
People and staff felt well supported and told us that the service was well managed.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection.
The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (Published August 2018)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
There was 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.’
At the previous inspection in November 2015, the service was rated as ‘good’ in all key questions. At this inspection we found there were areas for improvement and development. This was because at times people’s choices and wishes were restricted and limited and improvement was required in relation to the recording and documentation of some people’s care records and some of the quality assurance processes.
Staff were kind and caring in their approach and knew people well. However, people told us that there were not enough staff to have time to talk to them. There was a bath and shower rota in place and people told us they could not have a bath or shower as and when they chose. People were unable to have hot meals at breakfast and felt their breakfast options were limited.
There were times throughout the inspection when the registered manager informed us of conversations that had taken place and actions completed that we would not corroborate. This meant the recording of information and documentation required improvement.
People told us they felt safe at Greville House and we found there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People were safeguarded from harm. Staff demonstrated they knew how to spot signs of abuse and how to report concerns. Accidents and incidents were analysed to look for trends and reduce reoccurrence. Risks to people were minimised because staff knew people well and knew what to do to reduce the risks. People received their medicines as prescribed. The provider had safe recruitment procedures in place.
People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff had regular training and found this useful. They had regular training via a workbook. People told us they enjoyed the food and we saw that meal times were an enjoyable experience. People were involved in the development of the menu. People had access to professionals where required. At the time of inspection, there was nobody living at the service that was being deprived of their liberty. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 but required further training on this.
People’s needs were assessed and reviewed regularly with their involvement and input. Relatives were updated when things changed. People had a range of activities which they told us they enjoyed. People knew how to complain and we saw people and relatives approach the registered manager throughout the day. People’s independence was encouraged and their privacy and dignity was maintained.
People and relatives told us they felt the registered manager was approachable. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and this information was used to drive improvement. Processes and systems in place had not identified issues we identified.
This inspection took place on 9 November 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection on 12 November 2013, the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected.
Greville House is a residential care home providing care and support for up to 25 older adults with low dependency care and support needs. At the time of our inspection 22 people lived at the home.
There was 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People who lived at the home felt safe and secure. Relatives believed their family members were kept safe. Staff felt people were kept safe. The provider had processes and systems in place to keep people safe and protected them from the risk of harm.
People received their medicines as prescribed and appropriate records were kept when medicines were administered by staff who were trained to do so.
Risks to people had been assessed appropriately and equipment was maintained and available for staff to use.
There was sufficient staff on duty to meet the support needs of people. The provider ensured staff were recruited and trained to meet the individual needs of people.
People were supported to have choices and received food and drink at regular times throughout the day.
People were supported to access health care professionals to ensure that their health care needs were met. People’s health care needs were assessed and regularly reviewed.
People, relatives and health care professionals, felt staff were caring, friendly and treated people with kindness and respect.
People were involved in group or individual social activities to prevent them from being isolated.
People and relatives were confident that if they had any concerns or complaints, they would be listened to and the matters addressed quickly.
The provider had management systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided. This included gathering feedback from people who used the service and their relatives.
People using the service were supported to be involved and make decisions about their care. One person using the service said; 'It's like one big happy family here'.
People are in receipt of effective and appropriate care that meets their needs. All
staff we spoke with told us they had the information they needed to care for people safely. One member of staff said; 'I treat the people how I would treat my mum and dad'.
There were systems and procedures in place so that medicine was administered, stored and disposed of safely. People received their medicines as prescribed by their doctor to ensure their health needs were met.
All staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the manager, and had regular training opportunities. One member of staff we spoke to said; 'They have an open door policy here, I feel I can comment to them about anything'. This meant staff were supported by the provider to carry out their responsibilities.
People received a service that met their expectations and enabled them to make choices and they were involved in developments in the quality of the service they received through regular consultations. One person we spoke with said; 'If I have a grievance I am happy to take it straight to the top'.
We saw that people were involved in making choices about what they wanted to do and what they ate and drank. One person told us that staff asked them what help they wanted. People were able to maintain their independence.
People's health care needs were met by either visiting the doctor or having home visits from the doctor and other health care professionals.
People told us they had choices at all meal times and we saw that staff offered choices at lunchtime. One person told us, 'There's plenty of food'.
Staff knew how to protect people from harm and were confident that action would be taken to protect people if they raised any concerns. All the people we spoke with said they felt safe in the home.
Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs. One person told us, 'Staff are friendly, it's a very well organised home'. Another person told 'Staff come quickly if I buzz'.
The provider ensured that there was adequate monitoring of the service to ensure that people received a good service that met people's needs.