You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The inspection took place on 16 September 2016 and was unannounced.

Frintondene Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight older people. The service does not provide nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were eight people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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 supported with the day-to-day running of the service by a competent deputy manager.

People were safe because the management team and members of staff understood how to manage risk and recognise abuse or poor practice. People received safe care according to their individual needs.

There were sufficient staff who had been recruited safely and who had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs safely and in ways that they prefer.

The provider had safe systems in place to manage medicines and people were supported to take their medicines as prescribed.

People’s health needs were managed effectively with input from relevant health professionals. People were provided with food and drink that met their nutritional needs as well as their individual preferences.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. We found the provider was following the MCA code of practice.

The registered manager and deputy manager supported staff to provide appropriate care that was centred on the person and staff understood how to treat people as individuals.

People were treated with kindness and courtesy by staff who knew them well. Staff respected people’s choices and took their preferences into account when providing care and support. People were encouraged to spend their time in ways that they preferred and were supported to maintain relationships with friends and family so that they were not socially isolated.

Staff had good relationships with people who used the service and were attentive to their needs. People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

There was a family culture and the management team encouraged and supported staff to provide a good standard of individual care.

The provider had systems in place to check the quality of the service and take people’s views into account to make improvements to the service. They also had systems so that people could raise concerns and there were opportunities available for people or their representatives to give their feedback about the service.

The manager and deputy manager were freely available and actively involved in supporting people and staff. Staff were enthusiastic about the culture of the service and confident that their views were valued.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The service was safe

Staff understood how to protect people from abuse or poor practice. There were processes in place to listen to and address people’s concerns.

There were sufficient staff who had been recruited appropriately and who had the skills to manage risks and care for people safely.

The premises were well managed to meet people’s needs safely.

Systems and procedures for supporting people with their medicines were followed, so people received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The service was effective.

Staff received the support and training they needed to provide them with the information to provide care effectively.

Where a person lacked the capacity to make decisions, there were correct processes in place to make a decision in a person’s best interests. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were understood.

People’s health, social and nutritional needs were met by staff who understood their individual needs and preferences.

Caring

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The service was caring.

Staff treated people well and were kind and caring in the way they provided care and support.

Staff treated people with respect, were attentive to their needs and provided care in a dignified manner.

Staff understood how to relieve distress in a caring manner.

People were encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be.

Responsive

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The service was responsive.

People’s choices were respected and their preferences were taken into account when staff provided care and support in line with their individual care plans.

Staff understood people’s interests and encouraged them to take part in pastimes and activities that they enjoyed. People were supported to maintain family and social relationships with people who were important to them.

There were processes in place to deal with concerns or complaints and to use the information to improve the service.

Well-led

Good

Updated 15 November 2016

The service was well led.

The service was run by a capable management team who demonstrated a commitment to provide a service that put people at the centre of what they do.

Staff were valued and they received the support they needed to provide people with good care and support.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, to obtain people’s views and to use their feedback to make improvements.