You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 November 2016

This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 19 October 2016.

Remyck House is registered to provide care (without nursing) for up to 29 older people. There were 26 people resident on the day of the visit. The building offers accommodation over two floors in 23 single and three double rooms. The double rooms were used for single occupancy, therefore the service had no vacancies on the day of the inspection. The second floor was accessed via a staircase or lift. The shared areas within the service were adequate to meet the needs and wishes of people who live in the home.

The service has a registered manager running the service. 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, staff and visitors to the service were generally kept safe. However, we have made a recommendation about areas of safety that required review to ensure people were as safe as possible. Most risks were identified and managed to make sure that people and others were kept safe. Staff were provided with training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and health and safety. They were able to describe how they kept people safe from all forms of abuse and harm.

There were enough staff to safely support people. The service’s recruitment procedure ensured that as far as possible, all staff employed were suitable and safe to work with vulnerable people. People were given their medicines in the right amounts at the right times by staff who had been trained to carry out this task.

The management team and staff protected people’s rights to make their own decisions and consent to their care. The staff team understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and consent issues which related to the people in their care. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 legislation provides a legal framework that sets out how to act to support people who do not have capacity to make a specific decision. People in the home had the capacity to make their own decisions and choices and deprivation of liberties applications had been made, as was appropriate.

People were supported by staff that were given training and were skilled enough to provide safe and effective care. People were assisted to receive health and well-being care from appropriate professionals. Staff were trained in any necessary areas so they could effectively meet people’s diverse and changing needs.

Staff built relationships with people so that they were able to provide caring and compassionate support. People were encouraged to make as many decisions and choices as they could to enable them to keep as much control of their daily lives, as was possible. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect at all times. The service had a strong culture of person centred care which recognised that people were individuals with their own needs and preferences

The service was led by an experienced registered manager. The registered manager was described by staff as approachable and supportive. The provider and registered manager assessed and reviewed the quality of care provided. Some improvements were needed with regard to effective record keeping.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 25 November 2016

The service was mainly but may not always be safe.

Areas of safety such as fire safety and stairway safety needed to be reviewed.

People were given their medicines safely.

Staff protected people from any type of abuse.

There were enough staff to make sure people were cared for safely.

Staff were checked to make sure they were safe and suitable before they were allowed to work with people. However some parts of the application forms were changed to improve the service’s ability to check up on applicants.

Effective

Good

Updated 25 November 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported and cared for by staff who had been trained to meet their needs.

People were helped to take all the necessary action to stay as healthy as possible.

Staff encouraged and supported people to make as many decisions for themselves as they could and made sure they protected their rights.

Caring

Good

Updated 25 November 2016

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness, respect and dignity at all times.

Staff interacted positively and patiently with people.

People were helped to stay as independent as they were able for as long as possible.

The home had a homely atmosphere where people and staff felt comfortable.

Responsive

Good

Updated 25 November 2016

The service was responsive.

People’s needs were responded to quickly by the care staff.

Staff listened to people with regard to their daily choices and acted on their wishes.

People were recognised as individuals and were supported and cared for in the way that they preferred and that suited them best.

People were able to participate in a number of daily activities which they enjoyed.

People could make comments or complaints about their care. These were listened to and acted upon, if appropriate.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 November 2016

The service was well-led.

The service, generally, kept good records but some completion issues needed to be addressed.

Staff felt supported by a registered manager they were comfortable to approach.

The provider and registered manager checked the service was giving good care to people. They made changes to improve things, if they needed to.