You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

We carried out an unannounced inspection of this home on 24 August 2016. The home is registered to provide accommodation, nursing and personal care for up to 47 older people, some of whom live with dementia. Accommodation is arranged over two floors with lift access to the second floor. At the time of our inspection 39 people lived at the home and the provider told us they had used several of the accommodation rooms to provide additional recreational facilities for people who lived at the home. This meant the home always accommodated less people than they were registered to support.

A registered manager was 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. The registered manager was on holiday at the time of this inspection.

People were supported by staff who had a good understanding of how to keep them safe, identify signs of abuse and report these appropriately. Robust processes to check the suitability of staff to work with people were in place. There were sufficient staff available to meet the needs of people and they received appropriate training and support to ensure people were cared for in line with their needs and preferences.

Medicines were administered, stored and ordered in a safe and effective way. We have made a recommendation about how records are kept for medicines which are given as required or in a varied dose.

Risk assessments in place informed plans of care for people to ensure their safety and welfare, and staff had a good awareness of these. Incidents and accidents were clearly documented and investigated. Actions and learning were identified from these and shared with all staff.

People were encouraged and supported to make decisions about their care and welfare. Where people were unable to consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people were legally deprived of their liberty to ensure their safety, appropriate guidance had been followed.

People received a wide variety of nutritious meals in line with their needs and preferences. People had access to fresh fruit and snacks throughout the day and were encouraged to take fluids especially in the hot weather. Those who required specific dietary requirements for a health need were supported to manage these.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. Staff involved people and their relatives in the planning of their care.

Care plans in place for people reflected their identified needs and the associated risks. Staff were caring and compassionate and knew people in the home very well. External health and social care professionals were involved in the care of people and care plans reflected this.

Effective systems were in place to monitor and evaluate any concerns or complaints received and to ensure learning outcomes or improvements were identified from these. Staff encouraged people and their relatives to share their concerns and experiences with them.

The service had a good staffing structure which provided support, guidance and stability for people, staff and their relatives. Relatives spoke highly of all staff.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

The service was safe.

Risk assessments were in place to support staff in mitigating the risks associated with people’s care.

Staff had been assessed during recruitment as to their suitability to work with people and they knew how to keep people safe. There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were managed in a safe and effective manner. We have made a recommendation about the documentation of some medicines.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported effectively to make decisions about the care and support they received. Where people could not consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had received training to enable them to meet the needs of people. They knew people well and could demonstrate how to meet people’s individual needs.

People a wide variety of nutritious food in line with their needs and preferences.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

The service was caring.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. People were valued and respected as individuals and were happy and content in the home.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

The service was responsive.

Care plans reflected the identified needs of people and the risks associated with these needs.

People were supported to participate in events and activities of their choice and were encouraged to remain independent.

Systems were in place to allow people to express any concerns they may have and complaints were recorded and responded to in a timely way.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 September 2016

The service was well led.

People spoke highly of all staff. Staff felt very well supported in their roles.

Robust audits and systems were in place to ensure the safety and welfare of people in the home.