Archived: Genesis Residential Care Home Limited

The service registered with the CQC on 02 December 2010. During our inspection the registered manager informed us that they were considering changing their registration to reflect the lower numbers of people that it was providing care for.

The service is required to have 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.

People were not always safe in the home as the registered manager had not assessed all the factors that might pose a risk to people. However, staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and knew what constituted abuse. Most risk assessments were clear and detailed and reviewed regularly. Staff acted in accordance with the guidance and protocols that were in place to help reduce the risks for people.

Medicines were administered, stored and managed safely and appropriately and people received their medicines on time and in the manner the prescriber intended.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs appropriately and the staff on duty had the skills and knowledge to support people effectively and meet their needs in a timely manner. However, some training was in need of refreshing.

Appropriate and safe recruitment practices were followed, to ensure staff were suitable to work with people in a care environment. Staff received support from the manager which included supervisions and appraisals.

The CQC is required to monitor the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. The manager and quality assurance officer ensured the service operated in accordance with the MCA and DoLS procedures. Staff also demonstrated a clear understanding of the MCA, DoLS, capacity and consent. People were able to make their own decisions and choices as much as possible.

People received enough food and drink to meet their individual needs and staff had a good understanding and knowledge of people’s dietary needs. Prompt referrals were made to healthcare professionals as needed and any advice or guidance given was followed appropriately by staff.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their own care and staff appropriately supported people, when necessary, to make informed choices for themselves. The staff were kind, caring and compassionate. People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was upheld. People were also supported to do as much for themselves as possible, in order to enhance and maintain their independence.

People pursued hobbies and activities of their choice, which helped enhance their overall wellbeing. Visitors were welcome without restrictions and people were supported to form and maintain personal relationships. People were listened to and any complaints were fully investigated and actions taken to improve the quality of care provided. Staff and people living in the home could be involved in making decisions on how the home was run.

Record keeping and management systems were in good order, with effective auditing and follow up procedures in place. Environmental audits were regularly maintained and up to date.

We looked at people's care records. These were about to be improved but still provided an up to date picture of the person concerned, their needs and how those needs were met safely.

A range of other records were seen including staff training records and maintenance records. These showed that staff had received a range of training suited to their roles in the past year and that all required servicing and maintenance was up to date.

A member of staff told us that they regularly sat with people who used the service to talk about their care plans and support, although the care plans were not in a format suited to some of the people who used the service.

People who used the service told us that they felt safe, and would talk to staff or to the provider if they had any concerns.