Archived: Prudhoe House

Updated 26 March 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 21 January 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before we visited, we reviewed information we held about the home, including the notifications we had received from the provider concerning any accidents or incidents that had occurred. We also contacted the local authority commissioners for the service, the local Healthwatch, the local safeguarding team and the clinical commissioning group (CCG). Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion which gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services. Where organisations responded we did not receive any information of concern.

During this inspection we carried out observations using the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We met with all four people who used the service although only one person was able to communicate their views. We spoke with three family members after the inspection to get their opinions of the home. We also spoke with the registered manager and five other members of care staff. We contacted three healthcare professionals to ask for their views of the service but were only able to speak with two of them.

We observed how staff interacted with people and looked at a range of care records which included the care records for three of the four people who used the service, medicine records for two people and personnel records for four out of the eleven permanent staff. We also looked at four weeks of duty rotas, maintenance records, health and safety records, menus, all quality assurance records and a range of the provider’s policy documents.

After the inspection we asked the registered manager to send us a copy of their medicine procedures and other supporting documents which they did within the agreed timescales.

Updated 26 March 2015

The inspection took place on 21 January 2015. This was an unannounced inspection and was the first inspection since the provider registered in July 2013.

Prudhoe House provides residential care, with no nursing provision, for up to five people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were four people living at the home.

The service had 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.

Safe management of medicines was always followed; people told us they received the correct medicines from staff. Relatives told us there had been no issues with medicines. Risk assessments were always completed.

People told us they felt safe at the service and protected by the staff. Staff were aware of their personal responsibilities to report any incidents of potential or actual abuse to the registered manager. People told us there were enough staff at the service to support them and we confirmed this through records. We found emergency procedures, including fire safety were monitored and staff knew what to do in an emergency. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify any trends.

People told us they were happy with the food and refreshments available to them. We found staff were adequately trained and received induction, supervision and appraisal from the registered manager.

Staff followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. MCA assessments and ‘best interests’ decisions had been made where there were doubts about a person’s capacity to make decisions. The registered manager was in discussion with the local authority in regard to one person’s capacity.

People told us staff cared for them. Staff spoke with people in a caring and kind manner and treated them as individuals with respect and dignity. People’s care needs were detailed, recorded and reviewed by staff with input from people, their families and healthcare professionals.

People had choices and were able to participate in a wide range of activities. Staff encouraged and supported everyone to maintain social and family links. People and their relatives told us they knew how to complain and would be able to if necessary.

We found robust audits and checks in place to support the registered manager monitor the quality of the home.

Staff told us they felt supported by their colleagues and the registered manager.