• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Craignair E M I Residential Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

3 Blundellsands Road West, Blundellsands, Liverpool, Merseyside, L23 6TF (0151) 931 3504

Provided and run by:
Mr & Mrs S Neale

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

13 November 2017

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on Monday 13 November 2017 and was unannounced.

Craignair is a residential ‘care home’ which provides accommodation and personal care for up to 21 older people living with dementia. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of the inspection there were 20 people living at the home.

Accommodation is located over three floors; there are two TV rooms, a large social room and dining room. There is a large garden to the rear of the building and a car park at the front. The home is owned by Mr and Mrs S Neale and is situated in Blundellsands.

At the last inspection, which took place on 24 August 2015 the service was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and continued to meet all of the essential standards that we assessed.

There was no registered manager for the service at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is 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. We were informed by the owner of Craignair that they were currently recruiting for a registered manager and were ready to appoint a successful candidate.

We reviewed care plans and risk assessments and found that they contained up to date and relevant information in relation to the support needs of people who were living at the home. Care plans were person centred and reflected people’s individual wishes, choices and preferences.

Medication was safely managed and only administered by staff who had received the appropriate training. Medication records were accurate, regular medication audits were undertaken and people received all medication which was prescribed to them.

Safeguarding procedures were in place. All staff were able to explain their understanding of what ‘safeguarding’ meant and the actions they would take to safeguard people in their care.

We reviewed health and safety audit tools which were in place to monitor and assess the quality and standards of the home. There was a variety of different audits/checks conducted which meant that people were living in a safe, clean, well maintained and hygienic environment.

Recruitment was safely and effectively managed. Suitable and sufficient references as well as a disclosure and barring system check (DBS) were in place for all staff. DBS checks ensure that staff who are employed to care and support people are suitable to work within a health and social care setting.

The home operated within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We reviewed information in relation to capacity assessments and processes which needed to be in place to make decisions in a person’s best interest. Staff had received the necessary MCA/DoLS training. Peoples are plans and risk assessments contained current information in relation to their capacity and restrictions which were in place.

Staff were supported in their roles and completed the necessary training in order to effectively provide the care and support which was required.

We received positive comments about the standard and quality of food being provided. People had different options they could choose from and staff were familiar with specialist needs which needed to be supported.

There was a formal complaints process in place at the home and people informed us that they knew how to make complaints if they ever needed to. At the time of the inspection there were no complaints being investigated.

The home operated an ‘open door’ policy and the culture was supportive, caring, compassionate and respectful. People living at Craignair, staff and relatives we spoke with all provided us with positive feedback about the care being provided.

24 August 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 24 August 2015 and was unannounced. Craignair EMI Residential Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 21 older people with dementia. The home is owned by Mr and Mrs S Neale and is situated in Blundellsands near Crosby.

A registered manager was in post. 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 told us they felt safe living at the home and were supported in a safe way by staff. Families that we spoke with also told us they thought the home was safe and they were happy their relative was there. We observed staff interacting with people throughout the day and asking them if they were ok or needed anything. The staff we spoke with could clearly describe how they would recognise abuse and the action they would take to ensure actual or potential abuse was reported. Staff we spoke with confirmed they had received adult safeguarding training.

An adult safeguarding policy was in place for the home and the local area safeguarding procedure was also available for staff to access. This procedure included a flowchart to help staff with the reporting process.

Staff had been recruited appropriately to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. People living at the home, families and staff told us there was sufficient numbers of staff on duty at all times.

Staff told us they were well supported through the induction process, and had regular supervision and appraisal. They said they were up-to-date with all of the training they were required by the organisation to undertake for the job. Staff told us management provided good quality training. The registered manager was in the process of introducing all staff to the new care certificate, and we saw evidence of completed modules of this in staff’s files.

Various risk assessments had been completed depending on people’s individual needs. Care plans were in place and complete and they reflected people’s current needs, with particular reference to health needs if they had any. The risk assessments and care plans were reviewed on a monthly basis or more frequently if needed.

There were safeguards in place to ensure medicines were managed in a safe way. Medicines were administered by one allocated member of staff per shift. The administration took place in one of the front rooms. The staff member who administered the medication wore a red overall to highlight they must not be disturbed while giving out medicines. The building was clean, homely and dementia friendly. The provider was in the process of making the home more dementia friendly, such as painting doors a different colour and replacing the patterned carpets. There were measures in place to monitor the safety of the environment and equipment.

People were supported to access a range of external health care professionals when they needed to. Peoples care was personalised and diverse.

People told us they were satisfied with the meals. The food looked appetising and tasted nice. We observed people had plenty of encouragement and support at meal times.

People and their families described management and staff as caring, respectful and approachable. The families we spoke with had regular contact with the registered manager and the owner.

Families said the service was well managed and a family member told us they had recommended the home to other people. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and their preferred routines. We observed positive and warm engagement between people living at the home and staff throughout our inspection.

A full and varied programme of recreational activities was available for people to participate in and this was displayed in pictorial format in the hallway. Staff sought people’s consent before providing support or care. The home adhered to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Applications to deprive people of their liberty under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) had been submitted to the Local Authority.

The culture within the service was open and transparent. Staff and people living there said the management was both approachable and supportive. People told us they felt listened to and involved in the running of the home. Staff we spoke with were aware of the whistle blowing policy and said they would not hesitate to use it. There was a complaints procedure in place, and this was on display in the main part of the building. Quality assurance systems in place by the registered manager clearly showed continuous improvements being made in the delivery of care.

16 January 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We saw that the home's safeguarding procedures had been updated following our last inspection. They now included clear instructions about actions to take if staff needed to raise a safeguarding concern. This included the contact details of the local authority's safeguarding team.

Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about these procedures. They were able to describe how they would identify and report any signs of harm or abuse.

12 November 2013

During a routine inspection

Craignair predominately provides care and support to people living with a diagnosis of dementia. Therefore, many of the people living at the home were unable to tell us about their views and experiences. Due to this we spoke with one person who was able to give us their views and also to the relatives and friends of five people living in the home. We also observed the delivery of care.

During our inspection, we found the home to be warm and welcoming with a pleasant atmosphere. All of the five relatives and friends we spoke with spoke positively about the staff employed by the service and told us people were treated with dignity and respect. One relative told us they visited every day and felt the staff were helpful and attentive and responded promptly to the needs of both their relative and other people living at the home. Another relative said 'The staff are brilliant. If you hear a call bell go off, they go straight away.'

We reviewed three people's care records and found they contained the information staff required to provide care in a way which met people's individual needs. We found safeguarding arrangements were in place but staff did not all have the information they would need to respond to allegations of abuse. We checked the recruitment records for three members of staff. There was evidence that in most cases appropriate checks had taken place to ensure people were suitable to work within the home. A complaints system was in place within the home.

24 May 2012

During a routine inspection

On the day of the site visit people who lived at the home, their relatives and visitors were interviewed and asked their views about how the service involved them and kept them informed. Feedback was limited from people living at Craignair due to their level of communication, we were however able to make general observations of people's wellbeing, as further evidence of inclusion.

People spoken with generally confirmed that they felt like they were encouraged to express their views openly. They said staff were friendly and always on hand to talk to. One person said. 'Staff are lovely and very caring.'

People spoken with expressed the view they felt like they were treated with respect and dignity. They said their wishes were listened to.

On the day of the visit we spent some time observing the care and talking to people who lived at the home. Those people we spoke with said that staff supported them well. We saw there was good communication when staff carried out care.

We spoke with one person who said ''The staff look after me very well. They are very kind.'' We spoke with a relative who said staff worked well with them and reported any changes in the care very quickly. Another visitor told us that the standard of care was consistent and their relative was being well cared for. This showed the home was responsive to people's care needs.

People we spoke with all commented that the home was adequately maintained and was a nice place to both live in and visit. They told us that the home was always clean and that this was consistently maintained. People we spoke with commented favourably about the gardens. During our visit people were freely accessing the garden.

People spoken with described the positive support they got from the staff. They said there were always staff around if they were needed. They described the staff as caring. Some comments made were:

"The staff look after us well"

"The staff are there when they are needed"

Our observations evidenced that staff were attentive, respectful and sensitive to people's needs.

All the people spoken with knew how they could make their views known if they were not happy with the service provided. They said they would speak to the staff, the manager or a relative.

The relatives spoken with knew how to make their views known if they were not happy with the service provided. One told us about completing a survey conducted by the home, a process by which they could raise any issues.

8 February 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to four people who used the service. They all said that they were happy living at the home. They said they liked the food provided and that they liked the staff that support them. Most people spoken to knew how to make any concerns known if they were not happy with the service. Some comments made were:-

'I am happy here. The staff couldn't be better. It's home from home, there is good food and a good choice.'

'There is nothing nicer, the staff look after us beautifully. If I have a worry I know I can speak to the staff or the manager. I settled in well, it's nice and calm here.'

'The food is good and I am well cared for.'

'This is a nice place to be. The staff are nice people.'

We spoke to six relatives during our visit. All were very complimentary about the service provided. They said that a good standard of care was provided. Their relatives have seen health professionals when they were needed. They said the staff kept them informed and that the staff were caring, respectful and professional. Some comments made were:-

'Craignair is a homely place. We are kept well informed. The manager is very approachable and we can discuss any issues with them. There seems to be enough staff as there are always staff around.'

'I think it's a great place, the staff are very friendly and professional. We are happy with the care provided. The staff spoil our relative and always make sure they look nice which is very important to our relative.'

'The home is perfect. I can't fault it. The home is clean, staff are very nice and my relative is well looked after.'

We asked Sefton LINk and Sefton Council for information about how the service operated. No up to date information was available.

We asked health professionals who visited the home on a frequent basis their views of the service provided. The health professionals spoken with had positive views. They said that there always appeared to be enough staff, staff were polite and respectful towards the people who used the service and followed any instructions given. They said the people who used the service have always appeared well cared for.