You are here

The Old School House Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 4 May 2019

About the service: The Old School House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 36 older people who require personal care. The majority of people living at the home were living with dementia. Some people require nursing support and this is provided by the local community nursing team. At the time of the inspection, 18 people were living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

• There had been changes to the management structure of the home since the previous inspection. A new manager had been appointed and the senior management team had been strengthened with the appointment of a general manager supporting the provider. The provider had employed a management consultant and was working with the local authority and other organisations to improve the management of the home. People and staff told us the home had improved. We also received positive feedback from the local authority and the community nursing team.

• Comprehensive quality assurance audits had been put in place. A variety of audit tools ensured all aspects of service provision and health and safety were reviewed in detail by the management team each month.

• People told us they felt safe living at the home. Protocols and training provided staff with the information and guidance they required to identify and report suspected abuse.

• Some people told us they felt anxious about a person entering their rooms. The manager stated action was being taken to reduce the risk of this person entering people’s rooms. Following the inspection, the manager told us some people’s bedroom door locks had been changed to ones they found acceptable.

• Staff recruitment processes were safe and staff were employed in sufficient numbers to meet people’s care needs.

• People told us staff were kind, caring and respectful. Our observations showed staff were kind, caring, friendly and attentive. The increase in staffing levels allowed staff more time to spend with people, and not feel rushed. Staff enjoyed working at the home and confirmed improvements had been made since the previous inspection.

• The computerised care record system was being used to record people’s care needs and associated risk and provide staff with the guidance they required to meet people’s needs and reduce risks. However, where people were resistive to receiving support with their personal care, this needed to be better recorded, and flexible and responsive support detailed. Further attention was also needed to monitoring forms as we found these had not always been fully completed, or had inconsistencies.

• People’s healthcare needs were being met. We received positive feedback from the community nursing team about the care people received.

• The home was acting within the principles of the MCA. Staff sought people’s consent and where necessary with authorisation, restricted people’s liberty to maintain their safety.

• Medicines systems were organised and managed safely. Where the manager had identified supply and support issues with the pharmacist, action had been taken.

• Training in relation to people’s care needs required some further improvement and the manager had plans in place to address this.

• The provider and manager planned further improvements to the social and leisure activities provided for people and recognised the importance of meaningful engagement to people’s well-being.

• People told us they had no complaints and said they knew who to talk to if they had any concerns. Where complaints had been received, these were recorded and actions identified to resolve the issue.

• The home was clean, tidy and well maintained.

The home met the characteristics of a rating of “Good” for two key question and “Requires Improvement” for three key questions. Our overall rating for the home after this inspection was “Requires Improvement”.

We made four recommendations for improvement in relation to staffing levels, training, personal care and social engagement.

Rating at last i

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 May 2019

The service was safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 4 May 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 May 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 4 May 2019

The service was not always responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 4 May 2019

The service was not always well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.