You are here

Archived: Moorside Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

This inspection took place on the 25 and 26 July 2016 and was unannounced. Moorside is a care home registered to provide accommodation for up to 27 older people who require nursing or personal care and the treatment of disorder, disease or injury. The home provides care for people living with dementia and includes a day centre facility and short stay respite care for people living in the community. Moorside is located close to the centre of Winchester and the accommodation is arranged into three ‘clusters’ for up to eight people. Each cluster has a separate dining room, lounge and kitchenette. This provides people with a small and homely environment within the larger home. There is an attractive garden to the rear of the home which backs onto the river and a large day centre and activities room on the ground floor. At the time of our inspection there were 25 people living in the service.

A registered manager was in post at the time 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt ‘safe’ living at Moorside. Staff had completed training in safeguarding people from abuse and understood how to report their concerns. The registered manager acted on concerns to keep people safe and used learning from incidents to prevent a reoccurrence. People were cared for safely.

People were supported to be as independent as possible and risks to their health and wellbeing were assessed. This included risks to people from falls and behaviours which may challenge others. Staff understood how to support people to manage risks and acted to prevent people from experiencing harm.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs. People were supported by nursing and care staff on each cluster to ensure the appropriate mix of staff skills were available to meet their needs. We observed staff had enough time to spend with people to meet their needs in a patient and meaningful way. The provider carried out the appropriate pre-employment checks to confirm people were supported by staff who were suitable for their role.

People’s medicines were managed safely. Nursing staff administered people medicines and were regularly assessed as competent to do so by the deputy matron. When a medication error had occurred the registered manager reviewed procedures with the nursing staff to enable them to learn from the incident. Prompt action was taken with staff to rectify some recording errors we found and a procedure put in place to prevent a reoccurrence. Guidance was available and used by staff to ensure people had medicines prescribed ‘as required’ when they needed them. This included pain relief when people may not be able to verbalise their need for this.

Staff completed an induction and on-going training in their role to enable them to meet people’s needs effectively. Staff communicated well during daily handovers to keep each other informed about changes to people’s needs, their progress and any concerns. The registered manager attended handover and facilitated discussion to help staff think through their responses to meeting people’s needs. Staff shared their skills and experience to support each other’s learning and provide effective care for the people they supported.

Decisions about people’s care when they lacked mental capacity were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). When it was deemed to be in people’s best interest to restrict their freedom to keep them safe their rights were protected by an application for a Deprivation of Liberty (DoLS) safeguard. Not all decisions made in people’s best interests had been recorded; however the registered manager took immediate steps to implemen

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

The service was safe

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse. Staff had completed relevant training and understood their roles and responsibilities in relation to protecting people from the risk of harm.

Risks to people had been identified and actions were taken to ensure their safety. Risk management plans were in place to ensure people received safe and appropriate care.

People were supported by sufficient and suitably skilled staff to meet their needs safely.

People’s medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

The service was effective

Staff received an induction into their role, on-going relevant training and supervision of their work. People received their care from staff that were appropriately supported in their role.

People rights under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were protected. Procedures were in place and acted on to protect the rights of people who lacked the mental capacity to make their own decisions or agree to restrictions in their care and treatment.

People enjoyed a varied and nutritious diet which reflected their preferences and dietary needs. People at risk of poor nutrition were supported appropriately to prevent risks to their health and wellbeing.

People were supported by staff to access health care services as required and their healthcare needs were met promptly.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

The service was caring

People were cared for by kind and compassionate staff who knew them well.

People were given choices and involved in decisions about their day to day care and these were respected by staff.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected by staff.

People decisions and wishes about their preferences for end of life care were known and respected by staff. People and their families received the support they needed at this time.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

The service was responsive

People’s care and treatment plans were person centred and reflected their preferences and decisions. People’s care and treatment needs were reviewed and evaluated to ensure they received appropriate care and treatment.

People living with dementia received person centred care in an environment that promoted their wellbeing. People’s activity and social needs were met through a range of group based and individual activities provided by a team of activity staff, care staff and volunteers.

A system was in place for people to raise their complaints and concerns and these were acted on.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 October 2016

The service was well led

There was a positive open and empowering culture in the home. The registered manager encouraged a learning and development approach with staff based on best practice to provide a good quality service for the people they supported.

People, their relatives and staff spoke positively about the management and leadership of the service. Staff were supported to understand their responsibilities and to be accountable for their actions.

There were processes in place to enable the provider and registered manager to assess and monitor the quality of the service. Information from these processes, incidents and feedback from people, their relatives and staff was used to drive continuous improvement to the service.