You are here

Archived: Dormie House Residential Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

Dormie House is a residential home that provides care, support and accommodation for up to eight older people. At the time of our inspection there were eight people living in the home.

As the provider is an individual, the service is not required to have a separate registered manager. The provider is the ‘registered person’ and manages the day to day running of the service. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection in August 2016, we found the provider was in breach of two of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found sufficient improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

People were assured of their safety in the home now because the provider and care staff were able to demonstrate a full understanding of safeguarding and what constituted abuse.

There were enough well trained staff to support people and appropriate recruitment checks were carried out before staff began working in the home. The premises were well maintained and any safety issues were rectified promptly.

Identified risks to people’s safety were recorded on an individual basis and there was guidance for staff to be able to know how to support people safely and effectively.

Medicines were managed and administered safely in the home and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People were supported effectively by staff who were skilled and knowledgeable in their work and all new members of staff completed an induction. Staff were supported well by the provider.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. The provider understood the requirements of the MCA, although everybody living in Dormie House was deemed to have capacity and nobody was subject to DoLS. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People had enough to eat and drink and enjoyed their meals. If needed, people’s intake of food and drinks would be monitored and recorded. Prompt action and timely referrals were made to relevant healthcare professionals when any needs or concerns were identified.

Staff in the home were caring and attentive. People were treated with respect and staff preserved people’s dignity. Relatives were welcome to visit as and when they wished and people were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible. People were also able to follow pastimes or hobbies of their choice.

Assessments were completed prior to admission, to ensure people’s needs could be met. People were involved in planning their care and received care and support that was individual to their needs. Risk assessments detailed what action was required or had been carried out to remove or minimise any identified risks.

The service was being well run and people’s needs were being met appropriately. The provider and care staff were ensuring that a good quality service was provided and were promoting values that included involvement, compassion, dignity, independence, respect, equality and safety.

There were a number of systems in place to ensure the quality of the service provided was regularly monitored. Regular audits were carried out by the provider in order to identify any areas that needed improvement.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was safe.

Staff knew how to recognise signs of possible abuse and were confident in the reporting procedure.

The premises were well maintained and any safety issues were rectified promptly.

Risks to people�s safety were recorded on an individual basis and there was guidance for staff to be able to know how to support people safely and effectively.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people�s needs and appropriate recruitment procedures were followed to ensure prospective staff were suitable to work in the home.

People were supported to safely take their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were supported by way of relevant training, supervisions and appraisals to deliver care effectively.

People�s consent was sought and nobody was being unlawfully deprived of their liberty.

People had sufficient amounts to eat and drink in the home.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was caring.

Staff were caring and attentive. People were treated with respect and staff preserved people�s dignity.

Relatives were welcome to visit as and when they wished and people were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was responsive.

Assessments were completed prior to admission, to ensure people�s needs could be met and people were involved in planning their care.

People were able to choose what they wanted to do and where they wanted to spend their time.

People and their families were able to voice their concerns or make a complaint if needed and were listened to with appropriate responses and action taken where possible.

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was well led.

The service was well run and people�s needs were being met appropriately. Communication between the provider, staff, people living in the home and visitors was frequent and effective.

There were a number of systems in place to ensure the quality of the service provided was regularly monitored. Regular audits were carried out to identify any areas that needed improving.