You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

La Luz Care Home is a small family run care home that provides care and support for up to 16 people. The home is registered to support people with frailty due to old age, have dementia or a variety of care and mobility needs. The home is owned and operated by Mr and Mrs Soto and Mr Soto is also the registered manager. On the day of our inspection 15 people were living in the home.

The registered manager/provider was present for the duration of our inspection. 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.

Medicines were managed in a safe way and recording of medicines was completed to show people had received the medicines they required.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s care needs. Appropriate checks, such as a criminal record check, were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home.

Staff met with the registered manager on a one to one basis to discuss their work. Staff said they felt supported and told us the registered manager had good management oversight of the home.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and were able to tell us what they would do in such an event and they had access to a whistleblowing policy should they need to use it.

People were encouraged and supported to be involved in their care as much as possible. People’s bedrooms had been decorated to a good standard and were personalised with their own possessions.

People had individual care plans. These were detailed and updated regularly. They also contained the must up to date information for staff to enable them to be able to respond to people’s needs effectively.

People and staff interaction was relaxed. It was evident staff knew people well and understood people’s needs and aspirations. Staff were very caring to people and respected their privacy and dignity.

People were provided with a range of nutritious foods to maintain a healthy diet. People told us the food was very good and home cooked. We saw people had access to drinks and snacks throughout the day and staff provided support for people to eat and drink when required.

People had risk assessments in place for identified risk of harm. The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and put measures in place for staff to follow to mitigate any further accidents or incidents.

Staff had followed legal requirements to make sure that any decisions made or restrictions to people were done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Staff received a good range of training specific to people’s needs. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way.

The registered manager operated an open door policy and we say several examples of this throughout the day when staff, relatives and people who used the service sought their support and advice.

If an emergency occurred or the home had to close for a period of time, people’s care would not be interrupted as there were procedures in place to manage this.

A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was displayed in a format that was easy for people to understand. People and their relatives were encouraged to feedback their views and ideas into the running of the home.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

The service was safe.

Medicines were administered and stored safely.

People’s individual risks had been identified and guidance drawn up for staff on how to manage these.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and appropriate checks were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home.

Staff knew what to do should they suspect abuse was taking place and there was information to people living in the home should they need it.

There was a plan in place in case of an emergency.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had the opportunity to meet with the registered manager on a one to one basis to discuss aspects of their work.

Staff received appropriate training which enabled them to carry out their role competently.

People’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act were met. Where people’s freedom was restricted to keep them safe the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were being met.

People were provided with nutritious food and staff provide support to help people eat when the required this.

People had involvement from external healthcare professionals to support them to remain healthy.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

The service was caring.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff were caring and kind when supporting people.

People were encouraged to be involved in their care as much as possible.

Relatives and visitors were able to visit the home at any time.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

The service was responsive

People were able to take part in activities provided.

Staff responded well to people’s needs and their relatives were knowledgeable about their care plans and involved in any reviews.

A complaint procedure was available for people and relatives.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 October 2016

The service was well-led.

The registered manager had maintained accurate records relating to the overall management of the service.

Audits of records relating to people’s care and the management of the service took place to monitor quality.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager.

The registered manager submitted notifications as required.