Archived: St Vincents Care Home

There was a registered manager in place at the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

The risks relating to people’s care and treatment were not always identified and managed effectively.

Although, medicines were administered by staff who had received appropriate training and assessments they were not always managed safely and best practice guidance was not always followed.

Staff sought consent from people before providing care. However, people’s ability to make decisions was not always assessed in line with legislation designed to protect people’s rights. People were deprived of their liberty without the appropriate authority being in place.

There were systems in place to monitor quality and safety of the home provided, however, these were not robust and did not identify the concerns we identified during this inspection. People’s records were not always up to date and did not always reflect people’s needs.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to enable them to engage with people in a relaxed and unhurried manner. However, the recruiting practices was not robust and did not always ensure that a full employment history for new staff was available or a written explanation for any gaps.

People were supported by staff who had received an induction into the home and appropriate training, professional development and supervision to enable them to meet people’s individual needs.

People told us they felt the home was safe. Staff and the registered manager had received safeguarding training and were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns. Accidents and incidents were monitored, analysed and remedial actions identified to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

Staff developed caring and positive relationships with people and were sensitive to their individual communication styles, choices and treated them with dignity and respect. People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible and maintain relationships that were important to them.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Mealtimes were a social event and staff encouraged people, when necessary in a patient and friendly manner.

People and when appropriate their families were involved in discussions about their care planning,

There was an opportunity for people and their families to become involved in developing the service. They were encouraged to provide feedback on the service through residents meetings and an annual survey. They were also supported to raise complaints should they wish to.

People told us that they felt the home was well led and were positive about the registered manager who understood the responsibilities of their role. The provider was fully engaged in running the home and provided regular support to the registered manager. Staff were aware of the provider’s vision and values, how they related to their work and spoke positively about the culture and management of the home.

We found four breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

We looked at six care plans and saw they were individualised and included the necessary information to inform staff as to the specific care people required. We saw these were reviewed and people had signed to say they had read them. We observed care in the communal areas of the home and saw staff interacting with people in a positive way.

We saw the home was clean and well maintained. The manager told us they were responsible for overseeing infection control. We spoke with three members of staff and the manager, all of whom said they had received infection control training. Everyone we spoke with told us the home was always clean. One person said 'everywhere is always beautifully clean'.

Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work and there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. We found the provider had an effective quality assurance system and sought the views of people who use the service and their families through regular surveys. We spoke with two visiting health professional who told us they did not have any issues regarding the quality of the service provided. One said 'care here is absolutely spot on, a hundred per cent. It is a shining example'.

We observed staff providing care and saw that people looked happy and relaxed. We reviewed six care plans and associated risk assessments. Each plan was signed by the person and contained sufficient information to enable the appropriate care to be provided to people using the service. We saw that reviews of care were conducted regularly and the date of the review was included in their plan.

We spoke with three staff and confirmed that they had received appropriate training and had the skills necessary to carry out their duties. Staff had received safeguarding training and were able to say what action they would take if concerns were raised or observed. They told us that they felt there were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs. We spoke with two external healthcare professionals, who told us they were happy with the care that was provided at the home. They told us that there was good communication and they were kept informed about any changes in people's condition. They were positive regarding the care provided. One said 'Staff here are brilliant. It is a home from home. Staff are always available to come with you when you need them'.