You are here

Archived: Lenore Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The inspection took place on 22 and 24 August 2017 and the first day was unannounced. This meant the provider or staff did not know about our inspection visit.

We previously inspected Lenore Care Home in April 2015, and the service was rated Good.

Lenore care home is based in Whitley Bay and provides accommodation for people with learning disabilities and/or mental health issues, who require assistance with personal care and support. At the time of our inspection 22 people were using the service

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like directors, 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 storage, administration and disposal of medicines were safe. However, the temperature of the room the medicines were stored in was not checked each day. We saw by the second day this was in place. At the last inspection it was noted that protocols for medicines to be taken when required (PRN) were not available. We saw every person who received PRN medicines now had a protocol in place.

The service was in the middle of a full refurbishment programme. People who used the service had chosen the colours to paint the walls.

Risks to people arising from their health and the premises were in place. However, some risk assessments needed further information to inform staff how to mitigate the risks.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to keep people safe, meet their needs and ensure the premises were well maintained.

Safeguarding principles were well embedded and staff displayed a good understanding of what to do should they have any concerns.

There were effective pre-employment checks in place to reduce the risk of employing unsuitable members of staff. People who used the service were involved in the interview and selection process.

There was prompt and regular liaison with GPs, nurses and specialists to ensure people received the treatment they needed.

Staff completed a range of training, such as safeguarding, health and safety and first aid. Staff had a good knowledge of people’s likes, dislikes and life histories.

Staff had built positive, trusting relationships with the people they cared for. Staff were supported through regular supervision and appraisal. Staff told us the manger was supportive and willing to talk at any time.

People enjoyed the food they had and confirmed they had an input into the menus. People had access to the kitchen to make drinks, snacks throughout the day. However, staff observed to remind people washed their hands and to minimise the risk of infection.

People were supported to access activities of their choice. In house activities took place such as arts and crafts and cinema clubs.

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

The atmosphere at the home was relaxed, homely and welcoming. We saw numerous instances of caring and supportive interactions between staff and people during our inspection.

The manager completed a number of audits to ensure the quality of the service. The manager and senior support worker were devising a new medicine audit.

Staff, people who used the service, relatives and visitors we spoke with was positive about the registered manager’s impact on the service. We found the culture to be one where people received a good standard of care in a setting they found homely, safe and secure and were happy to live in.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The service was safe.

People received their medicines as prescribed and now had PRN protocols in place.

Risks to people were in place and reflected current needs. However, needed further information to support staff.

Staff understood safeguarding issues and felt confident to raise any concerns they had.

There were enough staff on duty and the registered provider carried out pre-employment checks to minimise the risk of inappropriate staff being employed.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The service remains effective.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The service remains caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The service remains responsive.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 September 2017

The service remains well led