Archived: Beachside Rest Home

Beachside Rest Home is registered to provide accommodation and care to up to 11 people over 65 years of age. The home specialises in the care of people who have mental health needs. At the time of this inspection there were five people using the service.

The last full inspection of the service was carried out in August 2013 when we found care planning was poor and unorganised, with care plan reviews recorded as single words. People and care staff were not involved in the writing and review of care plans so were unaware of significant changes. Following that inspection the provider sent us an action plan and we re-inspected the home in February 2014 looking specifically at the issues raised. At this inspection we found there had been a marked improvement in the way care plans were written and reviewed, with people and care staff involvement.

There is a registered manager 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 were supported to take part in activities and a hobby of their choice. A full activities programme was advertised and people’s art work was displayed in the home. Resident meetings were held so people could decide what activities they wanted and where they would like to go on days out.

There were procedures in place to keep people safe. These included a robust recruitment process and training for all staff to make sure they were able to recognise and report any suspicions of abuse. People told us they felt safe at the home and with staff. One person said, “Yes I feel very safe living here, it is my home.”

There were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe and to provide care and support in an unhurried manner. People told us staff were always kind and caring. Throughout the inspection there was a cheerful, relaxed and caring atmosphere. There was a consistent staff team with some staff working at the home for 20-25 years. This meant they knew people very well and people had been able to build trusting relationships with staff.

The management of the home was described as open and approachable and we were told by people and staff that they would be comfortable to raise any concerns. Where concerns had been raised within the home, appropriate action had been taken to make sure people were fully protected.

The registered manager’s philosophy for the way they saw the support they provided was, “Primarily to look after the residents and treat them as you would your own father and mother. To ensure they are happy, well looked after and their physical and emotional needs are met.” The registered manger explained how they ensured their staff also worked to the same philosophy and respected people’s rights. Staff reflected this philosophy in the way they spoke about people and the support they provided.

People were able to make choices about all aspects of their day to day lives. People were free to come and go as they liked and often spent time in town shopping or in their rooms following their own interests.

Everyone had a support plan which was personal to them, and people were involved in reviews of their care. Support plans gave information about people’s needs, wishes and preferred routines. This meant staff had enough information to provide appropriate support to each individual.

Medicines were administered safely. Medicines were administered by staff who had received suitable training. Safe procedures were followed when recording medicines. Medicines administration records (MAR) were accurate. There were no unexplained gaps in the medicines administration records. Audits of medicines had been completed and appropriate actions taken to monitor safe administration and storage.

During this inspection we spoke with two people who used the service, two care workers and the provider who was also the registered manager. We also looked at documentation including three care plans and the minutes of recent staff meetings.

People who used the service told us that they liked living at the home, they knew who their keyworker was and that the service met their needs. They told us that their care plan had been discussed with them, the staff were "kind and caring" and there was always someone around to provide help and support.

Care workers who we spoke with told us that they were now much happier with the care plans, information was far more readily accessible and they were more directly involved in both developing and reviewing the plans.

In care plans that we were shown we saw that significant improvements had been made. We saw that plans had been totally restructured with the use of dividers ensuring that the information in each section was concise, clearly identifiable and easily accessible. The plans had also been signed by people who use the service and care workers to confirm their involvement.

People who used the service told us that they liked living at the home and that the service met their needs. They told us that staff were 'kind and caring' and there was always someone around to provide help and support.

In accordance with their individual care plans, people were supported to make choices about their daily lives. However shortfalls were identified in the care planning process and care plans were found to be illegible and not fit for purpose. There was also a lack of involvement of people who used the service and care workers in developing and reviewing individual care plans.

Staff told us that they had received regular training and supervision and they felt they were supported to carry out their roles and meet the needs of people who used the service.

We found that care workers had developed awareness and a sound understanding of each individual's care and support needs. This was evident from direct observation of individuals being supported in a professional, sensitive and respectful manner.

Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to storing, administering handling and recording medicines.

The provider had satisfactory systems in place to deal with people's comments and complaints.

People who used the service told us that they like living at the home and that the service met their needs. People told us that staff were kind and caring and that there was always someone around to provide help and support. Comments included the following: "I am very happy here', and, 'it is a lovely place to live."

We made observations throughout the visit and saw people being offered choices as to what they wanted to eat or what activities they wanted to take part in during the day.

We saw people being addressed in a respectful manner. We looked at peoples individual care plans and saw that the information recorded enabled staff to plan and deliver the required level of care and support on an individual basis.

We saw that regular audits of the service were completed by the provider ensuring that people who used the service benefit from a service that monitors the quality of care that people received.

Staff told us that they had received regular training and that they felt that they were supported to carry out their roles and meet the needs of people who used the service.

People said that they had no complaints about the service and that if they did they would speak to the staff or the manager