You are here

Archived: BLHC Coote Lane Limited Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

We carried out an unannounced inspection at BHLC Coote Lane Limited (referred to throughout the report as Coote Lane) on 25 September 2018.

Coot Lane 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.

Coote Lane is registered to provide personal care for up to 24 people. There were 21 people living in home at the time of this inspection, some of whom were living with dementia. Accommodation is provided in single bedrooms, some with en-suite facilities, over two floors. A passenger lift is available to assist people to move freely around the home.

At our last comprehensive inspection in May 2017 we found improvements had been made. However, there were continuing shortfalls in relation to the way medicines were handled in the service and the lack of robust procedures to protect the rights of people who could not consent to their care in Coote Lane.

Following the inspection, the provider sent us an action plan which set out the action they were taking to meet the regulations. On this inspection of 25 September 2018, we found good progress had been made and the provider had met the action plan and was no longer in breach of the regulations. Medicines were judged to be well managed. The home was now complying with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that people’s rights were being upheld in line with the Act.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 had been in post for just over 12 months and was solely responsible for this home. People living in the home, their relatives and staff all spoke very highly of the new manager and the improvements made since her arrival and the change in management structure.

People felt safe living in Coote Lane and with the staff who supported them. Staff in the home were aware of their responsibilities in relation to protecting people from harm or abuse. Staff had received training and there was suitable guidance in place about making safeguarding referrals.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and were focussed on promoting their independence and well-being. The home assessed people prior to coming into them coming into the home to ensure that their needs could be met. This was followed by on-going assessments and care plans that were developed with the individual to set out how their needs were to be met.

Staffing levels were suitable for people’s needs. Staff recruitment was done correctly so that only suitable staff cared for vulnerable people.

There was a stable staff team who had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. The home had a programme of training and on-going staff supervision which ensured staff had up to date guidance and information for their roles.

People received the support they required to maintain good health. Medicines records were accurate and supported the safe administration of medicines. The home worked in partnership with external healthcare professionals. Healthcare professionals gave positive feedback on the care and of the monitoring of peoples changing health needs.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and people’s rights were upheld.

People were involved in planning their own support and the activities they wanted to take part in. There was a programme of activities for people to take

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service had improved from Requires Improvement and was now Good in Safe.

Medicines were now suitably managed.

Suitable systems were in place to protect people from harm and abuse.

The home was well staffed to provide care and support to people when they needed it.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service had improved to Good in effective.

Staff received suitable training, support and development.

The service understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act and people�s rights were protected.

People told us they liked the food provided and that they had plenty of choice.

People's healthcare needs were well managed and the home had developed good working relationships with healthcare professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was caring.

People who used the service spoke positively about the kind and caring nature of staff. They told us staff always respected their dignity and privacy when providing care.

Staff demonstrated a commitment to providing high quality care. They had a good understanding of the needs of people who used the service.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was responsive.

Assessment and planning for care were good. Care plans were person-centred and developed with the individual, and their families were appropriated.

A range of activities was provided to promote the well-being of people who used the service. People told us they were happy with the activities on offer.

Concerns and complaints were managed appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 November 2018

The service was now being well-led.

There was a registered manager in post. People spoke highly of the improvements brought in since a restructure and the new manager being in post. Staff morale had improved.

There were clear values underpinning the service which were focussed on providing high quality person centred care.

The owner and registered manager had ensured that robust systems were in place for monitoring the quality of the service.