Archived: Tapton Edge

We found the following examples of good practice

Relatives and friends were encouraged to keep in contact with their loved ones via telephone, video calls, letters, audio voice recordings and video clips. They were also able to visit in person by appointment, meeting in a vacant bedroom with a separate entrance or via window visits. There was a gazebo erected in the garden to facilitate outdoor visits in warmer weather.

The registered manager produced a regular newsletter with updates on what people living at Tapton Edge and the staff were doing. The newsletters also referenced the latest COVID-19 pandemic guidance for care homes. The registered manager had increased the frequency of these newsletters during the pandemic. Relatives had contacted CQC to tell us how much they had appreciated these updates, particularly when visiting was so restricted. The deputy manager also kept in regular contact with relatives and friends who were unable to visit as a result of their own personal circumstances.

The premises were clean and well maintained. Frequent touch points, such as handrails and door knobs were regularly cleaned. Staff supported people to keep apart as much as possible to try and maintain safe social distancing. For example, by moving chairs in communal areas further apart. PPE was readily available throughout the building.

All staff had received training in infection prevention and control and their competency in this area was regularly checked by the managers. Staff were seen to be following correct practice in this area. Staff spoken with were well informed and confident in infection prevention and control practices.

All people living and working at Tapton Edge had been offered a vaccine and were regularly tested for COVID-19 in line with government guidance.

Tapton Edge is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service can provide care and accommodation for up to 25 older people. At the time of our inspection 24 people were living at the service.

Tapton Edge is a converted Victorian house situated in the Fulwood area of Sheffield, close to shops, churches and bus routes. The home has a communal lounge, dining rooms and bathing facilities. Accommodation is provided over two floors, which can be accessed by a lift. To the rear of the home is a large landscaped garden and a car park is available.

At the time of our inspection there was 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.

There was an extremely strong person centred and caring culture in the home. (Person centred means that care is tailored to meet the needs and aspirations of each person, as an individual.) The management team and staff shared the vision of the service.

Staff told us they worked as part of a team, that Tapton Edge was a good place to work and staff were very committed to providing care that was centred on people's individual needs so that people were supported to achieve everything they wanted to.

There were systems in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns to the management team.

Safe recruitment processes were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people.

People were supported in a kind caring way that took account of their individual needs and preferences. People and their families were supported to express their views and be involved in decisions about their care.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems supported this practice.

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained, supervised and appraised. There was an induction and training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.

People received regular and ongoing health checks and support to attend appointments. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what people said. People could be confident that any concerns or complaints would be listened to and dealt with.

Systems were in place that continuously assessed and monitored the quality of the service.

This inspection was a focused inspection to look at the ratings for safe, effective and well led and to see what progress the provider had made since the last inspection.

Tapton Edge is a converted Victorian house situated in the Fulwood area of Sheffield, close to shops, churches and bus routes. The service can provide care and accommodation for up to 25 older people. At the time of our inspection 24 people were living at the service. The home has a communal lounge, dining rooms and bathing facilities are available. Accommodation is provided over two floors, which can be accessed by a lift. To the rear of the home is a large landscaped garden and a car park is available.

There was a manager in place. 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 who used the service told us they felt safe.

Medicines were managed safely

Risks to people using the service were assessed and plans put in place to reduce the risk of them occurring. Risks to people from premises and equipment were also assessed and reviewed.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and investigated to see if improvements were needed to keep people safe.

Plans were in place to ensure people received the support they needed in emergency situations. Policies and procedures were in place to help protect people from abuse. Staff had access to a safeguarding policy. The registered manager monitored staffing levels to ensure they were sufficient to keep people safe. Recruitment procedures minimised the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.

Tapton Edge is a converted Victorian house situated in the Fulwood area of Sheffield, close to shops, churches and bus routes. The service can provide care and accommodation for up to 25 older people. At the time of our inspection 24 people were living at the service. The home has a communal lounge, dining rooms and bathing facilities are available. Accommodation is provided over two floors, which can be accessed by a lift. To the rear of the home is a large landscaped garden and a car park is available.

The home had a registered manager in place. 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.

Safeguarding alerts had been made when needed. Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if they suspected abuse might be taking place.

Risk assessments were in place for people who needed them. They were specific to people’s needs. However, risk assessments were not always reviewed effectively on a monthly basis. Foot-notes were used to detail any changes but his made the risk assessment difficult to navigate and understand the persons current needs.

Emergency procedures were in place for staff to follow and personal emergency evacuation plans were in place for everyone. A robust procedure for recording fire drills was in place.

There were sufficient staff on duty. People told us there was enough staff on duty day and night to meet their needs. A dependency tool was not used but this did not have a negative impact on people's care.

Medicines were managed appropriately. The service had policies and procedures in place to ensure that medicines were handled safely. Medication administration records were completed to show when medicines had been administered. Staff confirmed that medication storage room temperatures were read daily, however this was not recorded.

Certificates were in place to ensure the safety of the service and equipment used. Maintenance and fire checks had been carried out regularly by the service.

Robust safe recruitment processes were not in place. References had not always been received before new staff started employment. Disclosure and Barring service checks had not been obtained.

Staff performance was monitored through a system of supervision and appraisal. However, these meetings were not recorded fully and no evidence was available to confirm what had been discussed and any actions as a result of these meetings.

Staff had completed an induction process with the provider. Of the eleven training records we looked at, all had up to date training. People told us they felt staff had the knowledge and skills needed to care for them.

People were supported to maintain their health. People spoke positively about the nutrition and hydration provided at the service. Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if people became at risk of malnutrition or dehydration. However, some people's weights were monitored using visual checks which did not determine an accurate weight.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge and understanding of the requirement of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard and knew what action they would take if they suspected a person lacked capacity.

Each person was involved with a range of health professionals and we saw records to confirm this. From speaking with staff we could see that they had a good relationship with the health professionals involved in people’s care.

The lounge area was big enough to accommodate people who wished to use it. People had spacious bedrooms which included their personal possessions and were able to spent time in private as when they wished to do so.

People spoke highly of the service and the staff. People told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

People, and where appropriate their relatives, were actively involved in care planning and decision making. This was evident in signed care plans. Information on advocacy was displayed within the home and was available should people need it.

Care plans detailed people’s needs, wishes and preferences and where person-centred. People’s life history was documented. However, one care plans had not been updated when changes had occurred, instead 'foot-notes' had been added to document changes resulting in difficulties to navigate around the care plan.

Activities were planned in advanced and displayed on a large notice board within the home. We saw that people participated in activities and people told us there were a range of activities on offer.

The registered provider had a clear process for handling complaints. There had been no complaints made in the past twelve months.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and felt supported by the registered manager. Staff told us they were confident any concerns would be dealt with appropriately. We could see from our observations and from speaking to people and staff that the registered manager had a visible presence at the service.

Quality assurance processes were in place. Records confirmed these were completed on a regular basis. However, the audits failed to record areas where action needed to be taken.

Accidents and incidents were monitored to identify any patterns and appropriate action was taken to reduce risks.

Feedback from staff, people who used the service and relatives was sought. However, no action plans had been developed as a result. The registered provider did take action to correct concerns raised following the inspection.

The service worked with various healthcare and social care agencies and sought professional advice to ensure the individual needs of the people were being met.

The registered manager understood their role and responsibilities. Notifications had been submitted to CQC in a timely manner. Notifications are documents about changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales.

People who used the service told us they were happy living at the home. Their comments included, 'It's really good here, I can't find anything to grumble about,' 'Everything is really good, I have no problems" and 'The staff are very kind, caring and considerate."

We spoke with a visiting healthcare professional. They said, "When we are here treating people, we are thoroughly supported and appreciated by the staff. We can see that this is one of the best homes in the area. We have never had any concerns about the care provided at this home."

Information that we received from Sheffield Local Authority, Contracting and Commissioning confirmed to us that they did not have any current concerns about the home.

We found people were provided with a choice of nutritious food and people's dietary needs were met.

During our visit we found the ambience in the home was friendly and homely. People were cared for and supported in a clean, safe and well maintained environment.

We found there was an effective recruitment procedure in place and relevant checks were carried out when staff were employed.

We found that records were held securely and retained for an appropriate period of time.