You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection carried out by one inspector on 13 and 16 November 2015. We last inspected the home in January 2014 when we found the service was compliant with regulations and the standards required at that time.

The home had a registered manager who had been employed since December 2014 and registered in November 2015. 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.

The home is registered to accommodate 19 people and at the time of inspection 17 people were living at the home, the majority of whom were accommodated for frailty associated with old age.

Dalvey House provided a safe service to people. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and were knowledgeable about how to refer any concerns of abuse.

Risks to people’s health concerning delivery of their care or concerning the physical environment, had been assessed to make sure that people’s care and the home ran as safely as possible .

Accidents and incidents were monitored and audited to see if there were any trends that could make systems and care delivery safer.

The home employed sufficient staff to meet people’s needs.

Robust recruitment procedures were followed to make sure competent and suitable staff were employed to work at the home. The home had a full complement of staff at the time of inspection.

Medicines were managed safely in the home.

The staff team were well-trained and there were systems in place to make sure staff received update training when required.

The home was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, with appropriate applications made to the local authority for people at risk of being deprived of their liberty.

People’s consent was gained for how they were cared for and supported.

Staff were supported through one to one supervision and annual appraisals.

People were provided with a good standard of food and their nutritional needs met.

People were positive about the staff team and the good standards of care provided in the home. People felt their privacy and dignity were respected.

Care planning was effective and up to date, making sure people’s needs were met.

The home provided a full programme of activities to keep people meaningfully occupied.

The home had a well-publicised complaints policy and when a complaint was made, they were logged and responded to.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided to people.

There was good leadership of the home and a positive ethos and culture prevailing in the home.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

People received safe care in a safe environment where risks were identified and minimised through risk management.

There were sufficient well-trained staff employed to meet people’s needs.

There were robust recruitment procedures followed to make sure suitable staff were recruited to work at the home.

Medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

Staff were well-trained and supported to fulfil their role.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People’s consent was obtained about the way they were cared for and their treatment choices.

People’s dietary and nutritional needs were being met.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

People were very positive about the home and the quality of the care provided.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

People received personalised care and up to date care plans were in place to inform the staff of people’s needs.

A full programme of activities was provided in the home to keep people meaningfully occupied.

There was a well-publicised complaints procedure and complaints were responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 January 2016

The new registered manager had made many changes and demonstrated good leadership of the home.

There was a positive, open culture with management seeking to improve the service where this was possible.

There were systems in place to monitor the safety of the service provided to people.