Background to this inspection
Updated
24 February 2017
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of ¿our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 19 and 20 January 2017 and was unannounced. It was carried out ¿by one adult social care inspector.¿
Before the inspection we looked at the information we held about the home. This included ¿notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the ¿provider is required to send us by law. We reviewed previous inspection reports. We looked at the ¿Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key ¿information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.¿
During the inspection we spoke with six people at length about their care and the home more ¿generally. We also spoke with three relatives who were visiting. ¿
We spoke with three care staff, the maintenance person, the deputy manager and the registered ¿manager. We observed care and support in communal areas and looked at four people’s care ¿records. We also looked at records that related to how the home was managed such as staff ¿training and staff meeting records, staff rotas, one staff personnel file, health and safety checks ¿and records of resident’s meetings.¿
Updated
24 February 2017
This inspection took place on 19 and 20 January 2017 and was unannounced. It was carried out ¿by one adult social care inspector.¿
The Laurels Residential Home can accommodate up to 20 older people who require personal ¿care. There were 17 people living at the home during our inspection.¿
A registered manager was responsible for the service. This 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.¿
On both days of our inspection there was a homely, calm and relaxed atmosphere. Staff ¿interacted with people in a friendly and respectful way. People were encouraged and supported ¿to maintain their independence and to pursue their interests and hobbies. They made choices ¿about their day to day lives which were respected by staff. One person said, ““I am quite capable ¿of making my own decisions. Staff always respect the decisions I make.”¿
People and their relatives said the home was a safe place to live. People spoke very highly of the ¿care they received. One person said, “All of the staff are lovely to me. There’s such a lovely, ¿homely atmosphere.” People were involved in planning and reviewing their own care. Staff ¿respected people’s privacy and were aware of issues of confidentiality.¿
People told us staff took the time to really get to know them; staff asked them about their life ¿history, their interests, hobbies and preferred routines. There was a varied programme of activities ¿and outings in line with people’s interests. People were involved in the local community. They ¿had a choice of nutritious, home cooked food. Each person we spoke with said they were happy ¿with the food and drinks served in the home. One person said, “The food is delicious here. You ¿get a choice; they ask you every day.”¿
People had developed friendships with others who lived in the home; they kept in touch with their ¿other friends and relations. Friends and relatives could visit at any time. One relative told us, “I ¿usually pop in every day. Never a problem. Always welcome; you can pop in whenever you like.” ¿
There was a stable staff team at the home. Staff were kind and caring. They had an excellent ¿knowledge of people’s care needs. Staff received a thorough induction and ongoing training and ¿support. ¿
People were involved in decisions about the running of the home as well as their own care. ¿People knew how to make a formal complaint if they needed to but no one had needed to. One ¿person said, “This is the best home you could find. It’s excellent here, it really is.”¿
The management structure in the home provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability. ¿The provider had recently changed ownership. A new system of audits and checks had recently ¿been introduced by the new owners to monitor people’s safety and the quality of care in a more ¿effective and consistent way. The registered manager was also being provided with improved ¿support.¿
We found a breach of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations ¿¿2014.This was because people’s care plans did not always reflect the care people needed and ¿the care being provided. The informal systems previously used to monitor the quality of the ¿service and ensure necessary improvements were carried out had not been fully effective. You ¿can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.¿