You are here

The S.T.A.R. Foundation Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 27 November 2018

The inspection was unannounced, and took place on 7 November 2018. The home was last inspected in September 2017 where concerns were identified in relation to governance, consent, and a failure to display CQC ratings and make required notifications to CQC. The home was rated “requires improvement” at that inspection.

The S.T.A.R Foundation is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The home is located close to the town centre of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in its own grounds in a quiet, residential area, but close to many amenities and public transport links. The home accommodates up to 60 people with support needs including dementia, physical disabilities and mental health conditions. At the time of the inspection 60 people were using the service. The home comprises three discrete units, each consisting of separate “pods” of four en suite bedrooms with a kitchen/diner and living area, as well as central communal facilities, including a large lounge area, a therapy pool and a sensory room. The home is known locally as Astrum House.

The service had registered manager. 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.

We found that staff went about their day to day duties treating people with respect and dignity. We observed a genuine warmth when staff spoke with people and staff told us that treating people respectfully was the most important part of their job.

The home environment was designed to meet the needs of the people living there, with a range of facilities including a hydrotherapy pool. The home had an activities coordinator who devised a varied activities programme, including activities both within the home and within the local community.

Medicines were stored and handled safely. Where people were at risk of harm, or presented a risk to others, there were appropriate risk assessments in place to ensure staff kept people safe.

Recruitment procedures were sufficiently robust to ensure people’s safety.

We looked at the arrangements for complying with the Mental Capacity Act, and found that although on the whole this was adhered to, improvements were required in the way consent was obtained and recorded.

Mealtimes were observed to be comfortable and pleasant experiences for people. People told us the food available was always good.

The management team were accessible and were familiar to people using the service. The provider had a system in place for auditing the quality of the service, although we identified improvements could be made to this. There were arrangements for obtaining and acting on feedback from people using the service and their friends and relatives.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 27 November 2018

The service was safe. Medicines were stored and handled safely, with staff having appropriate training to ensure that people received medicines in a safe way.

Where people were at risk of harm, or presented a risk to others, there were appropriate risk assessments in place to ensure staff kept people safe.

Recruitment procedures were sufficiently robust to ensure people’s safety.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 27 November 2018

The service was not always effective, as improvements were required in the way consent was obtained and recorded.

Mealtimes were observed to be comfortable and pleasant experiences for people. People told us the food available was always good.

Staff received a high standard of training which they told us they found useful and said it helped them undertake their roles.

Caring

Good

Updated 27 November 2018

The service was caring. We found that staff went about their day to day duties treating people with respect and dignity. We observed a genuine warmth when staff spoke with people and staff told us that treating people with respect was the most important part of their job.

The home environment was designed to meet the needs of people with dementia and physical disabilities, and people told us they were happy with the home environment.

Responsive

Good

Updated 27 November 2018

The service was responsive. The home had an activities coordinator who devised a varied activities programme, including activities both within the home and within the local community.

There was a formal complaints procedure in place, and people we spoke with told us they would feel confident to complain if they wished to.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 27 November 2018

The service was not always well led. The management team were accessible and were familiar to people using the service. The provider had a system in place for auditing the quality of the service, and for obtaining and acting on feedback from people using the service and their friends and relatives, although we noted that actions arising from audits were not recorded and there was no evidence they were followed up.

The provider had not acted fully on the shortfalls, concerns and breaches identified at the last inspection.