• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Plymouth House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Alcester Road, Tardebigge, Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, B60 1NE (01527) 873131

Provided and run by:
Plymouth House

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 9 February 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 19 December 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection team was made up of two inspectors.

We looked at the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notification’s received from the provider about deaths, accidents and safeguarding alerts. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form the provider completes to give some key information about the home, what the home does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider returned the PIR and we took this into account when we made the judgements in this report.

We requested information about the service from the local authority and the clinical commissioning team [CCG]. They have responsibility for funding people who lived at the home and monitoring the quality of care. In addition to this we received information from Healthwatch who are an independent consumer champion who promote the views and experiences of people who use health and social care.

We met people who lived at the home and spoke with four people in more detail and two relatives. We spent time with people in the communal areas of the home and saw how staff supported people throughout the day.

We spoke with the provider, registered manager, deputy manager, a nurse, six staff members who included the cook and activities co-ordinator. We looked at the care records for three people and medicine records for five people. We also looked at staff rotas, menus, complaints, quality monitoring and checks the management team made.

We asked the registered manager to send us some further information about staff training. This was sent to us as we requested.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 9 February 2017

This inspection took place on 19 December 2016 and was unannounced.

The provider of Plymouth House Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation with personal and nursing care for up to 24 people. Care and support is provided to people with dementia, personal and nursing care needs. At the time of this inspection 23 people lived at the home.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of this inspection who was also one of the provider’s. 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.

People had no concerns about their safety. Risks to people’s safety had been identified and staff had training in how to recognised and report abuse.

Staff were recruited in a safe way and had relevant training and support to develop their skills in meeting people’s needs. People were cared for by staff who knew them well and responded to their needs. Staff were visible in communal areas where they supported people at times they needed assistance and similarly people received support when they remained in their own rooms. Staffing arrangements were reviewed regularly to ensure there were enough staff to meet people’s particular needs.

People had their medicines when they needed them and staff had been trained to manage medicines both safely and effectively. Staff used an electronic system to assist them in making sure medicines were administered at the right times and in the right doses to meet people’s health needs.

Staff told us their training was up to date. All staff felt they supported each other and worked well as a team in order to effectively and safely meet people’s needs. Staff were aware of people’s individual needs and how to respond to risks to their health, such as falling or developing sore skin. People had been assisted to eat and drink enough and they had been supported to receive all of the healthcare assistance they needed. People who lived at the home and their relatives were complimentary about the quality of the care staff provided.

Staff had ensured that people's rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. Where people lacked capacity to make informed decisions these were made by people who knew them well and had the authority to do this in people’s best interests. Staff practices ensured people received care and support in the least restrictive way to meet their needs. When people’s needs changed staff responded to these and sought the advice of health and social care professionals so people had the care and treatment they needed.

People who lived at the home and their relatives had built trusting relationships with staff who they had come to know well. Staff had a high degree of knowledge about people's individual choices and preferences. Staff recognised people's right to privacy, promoted their dignity and respected people’s confidential information.

People were happy with the access and availability to participate in thing they liked to do for fun and interest. People who lived at the home and their relatives were supported to provide their views about the support and care offered. The provider had responsive systems in place to monitor and review complaints to ensure improvements were made where necessary.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The providers and management team showed they had an accountable and responsive approach and were motivated to continue to make on-going improvements to ensure people received a good quality service at all times.