You are here

Derwent House Residential Home Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 24 March 2018

This inspection took place on 24 and 31 January 2018 and was unannounced.

At our last inspection in November 2016 we rated the service as 'Requires Improvement'. There was a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, because record keeping within the service needed to improve. We saw evidence that care files and risk assessments were not always accurate or up to date. This meant that staff did not have access to complete and contemporaneous records in respect of each person using the service, which potentially put people at risk of harm. At this inspection we found record keeping had improved and the service was now meeting legal requirements.

Derwent House Residential Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service is registered to support up to 65 older people and people living with dementia. The service is divided into two different areas; Derwent House supports people with nursing and residential care needs and Riverview Lodge supports people living with dementia. The service is set in a rural position, to the east of the city of York. There is a large car park to the front of the building providing ample parking on-site for staff and visitors. On the day of the inspection 53 people were using the service.

The registered provider is required to have a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. At the time of the inspection there was a new manager in post who had been working at the service for about four months; they had submitted their application to register as the manager of the service. Shortly after the inspection their application was accepted. We have therefore referred to them as the ‘registered manager’ in this report.

Medicines were stored and administered safely by staff. The recording of medicines received by the service was not always clear and protocols for ‘as required’ medicines were required for some people. We have made a recommendation about this in our report.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. Risks were appropriately assessed and managed. There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs and the provider had employed a number of new staff recently, in order to reduce the usage of agency staff. Robust recruitment procedures were followed in order to ensure the suitability of workers.

There were cleaning schedules in place and the service was clean, tidy and free from malodours.

People were supported to have 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.

Staff were supported in their role; they received induction, training and supervision. We found staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs.

People were able to access healthcare professionals, such as GPs, when they needed to. Information about people’s health needs and contact with healthcare professionals was recorded in their care files. We received positive feedback about the quality of meals provided and people were appropriately supported with their nutrition and hydration requirements.

People and relatives we spoke with told us that staff were caring, pleasant and helpful. We observed positive, warm interactions between people and the staff that cared for them. People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

Activities were available to people, such as crafts, music sessions and games. The service built li

Inspection areas



Updated 24 March 2018

The service was safe.

Risks were assessed and appropriately managed. Staff demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding vulnerable adult procedures.

Medicines were administered safely by staff, but clearer recording of medicines received was required.

Robust recruitment procedures were followed. Additional staff had been recently recruited in order to reduce the number of agency staff used.



Updated 24 March 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received relevant training and supervision in order to meet people’s needs.

People were appropriately supported with their nutrition and hydration, and had access to external healthcare professionals when required.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

The environment was suitable for people’s needs and the provider demonstrated knowledge of legislation and best practice.



Updated 24 March 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by caring and attentive staff. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff. Staff encouraged people’s independence where possible.

Staff made suitable adjustments to meet the diverse needs of people who used the service.



Updated 24 March 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were in place and regularly reviewed. These gave staff the information they needed to support people in line with their wishes and needs.

Activities were available at the home, where people wished to participate.

People were able raise complaints and give feedback about the service they received. Complaints were investigated and responded to.



Updated 24 March 2018

The service was well-led.

Record keeping within the service had improved since our last inspection and the provider was now meeting legal requirements.

Some policies and procedures had been reviewed but work was on-going to complete the review of all policies to ensure they reflected current regulations and best practice guidance.

Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided.