You are here

Archived: Clanfield Residential Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 27 July 2016

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on the 27 July 2016.

Clanfield accommodates and cares for up to 30 older persons with a range of mainly age related dependencies, including people with dementia care needs. There were 26 people in residence when we inspected.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 safe. Their needs were assessed before they were admitted to the home and regularly reviewed to ensure they received appropriate and timely care. They also benefited from being cared for by sufficient numbers of experienced staff that had received the training they needed to do their job safely. Staff knew what was expected of them when caring for older people, including those with dementia care needs, and they carried out their duties effectively and with compassion.

People were safeguarded from abuse and poor practice by staff that knew what action they needed to take if they suspected this was happening. There were recruitment procedures in place that protected people from receiving care from staff that were unsuited to the job.

People’s medicines were appropriately and safely managed. Medicines were securely stored and there were suitable arrangements in place for their timely administration. People’s healthcare needs were met and they received treatment from other community based healthcare professionals when this was necessary.

People’s individual nutritional needs were assessed, monitored and met with appropriate guidance from healthcare professionals that was acted upon when required. People had enough to eat and drink and enjoyed their meals. People that needed support with eating and drinking received the timely practical help they required. Sometimes staff, however, needed to be better at keeping people with dementia informed about their meal, such as describing what was on the plate even if the person’s comprehension of what was said had been compromised by their condition.

People’s individual preferences for the way they liked to receive their care and support were respected. People’s care needs had been assessed prior to admission and they each had an agreed care plan that reflected their individual needs. Their care plans were regularly reviewed and provided staff with the information and guidance they needed to do their job. People were enabled to do things for themselves by staff that were attentive to each person’s individual needs and understood their capabilities. People received support from staff that demonstrated that they understood what was required of them to provide people with the care they needed. Staff were caring, friendly, and attentive, although at times they could be better at engaging people in spontaneous conversation as they passed through communal areas.

People were treated with dignity and their right to make choices was upheld. There were imaginative activities to keep people entertained and constructively occupied if they chose to participate in them. People were kept informed of organised activities and were encouraged to make suggestions about what they wanted to do so plans could be made.

People’s views about the quality of their service were sought and acted upon. The quality of the service provided was regularly audited so that people benefitted from any improvements that were made. People and their relatives or significant others were assured that if they were dissatisfied with the quality of the service they would be listened to and that appropriate action would be taken to resolve matters to their satisfaction.

Inspection carried out on 19/11/2015

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on 19 November 2015. The service provides support for up to 30 older people who require support with their personal care. At the time of our inspection there were 22 people living at the home.

There was 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 felt safe living at the service however we found that improvements were required to the safeguarding procedures that were in place. Staff were unaware of how they could directly report any safeguarding concerns to external agencies and the providers policy contained out of date information. We also found that improvements were required to the timeliness of updates to people’s risk assessments when people’s needs had changed. There were enough staff to meet keep people safe however staff were not able to devote attention to people beyond meeting their care needs. The environment was maintained to ensure people were safe and there were robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure suitable staff were recruited. People were supported to take their medicines safely.

People were supported to have a balanced diet and monitoring systems were in place to ensure people remained within a healthy weight however mealtimes were not person centred. Improvements were required to ensure people were given adequate choices at mealtimes and to ensure people were supported to eat their meal with dignity. People’s healthcare needs were safely met in a timely way by healthcare professionals and these were reviewed at appropriate intervals. The management team had a suitable understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and the responsibilities that the Act placed on them. Staff training was sufficient and staff had adequate support and guidance to perform their roles satisfactorily.

Strong quality assurance mechanisms were not embedded into practice at Clanfield Residential Home. This meant that the provider was unaware of policies that were no longer accurate or contained insufficient information. Medication audits were carried out however insufficient records were maintained in relation to this. The management team used staff to identify when improvements needed to be made to the service however the opportunities for providing feedback was not embedded into practice. Staff played their part in ensuring people received good quality care and had confidence in the management team.

This was a breach in regulation and you can see what action we told the provider to take at the end of the full version of this report.

People generally spoke well about the staff and said that they were treated well however people also gave feedback that staff did not always have sufficient patience with them. Staff showed empathy and kindness to people when they became distressed and understood how best to support them. People were given a choice about how they would like to spend their time and this was respected by the staff. Staff had a good understanding of people’s backgrounds and there was evidence of them using this to encourage them to reminisce about their past.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were in place to ensure the service could offer appropriate support to meet people’s needs however sufficient detail about the support each person required, from the start of their arrival was lacking. Care plans were regularly updated and people were supported in accordance with what was recorded in their care plan however they contained inaccurate and irrelevant information that had the potential for staff to provide inappropriate support. An interactive activity programme was in place and people told us they enjoyed the activities that were on offer within the home. People were invited to meetings about the home and they were asked for their input to make their lives better and to make suggestions for forthcoming events. People told us they felt listened to and their suggestions were acted on. People told us they did not have any complaints and would be confident to speak to the staff if they were concerned about something.

Inspection carried out on 6 September 2013

During a routine inspection

As part of our inspection we looked at the care and welfare of the people who lived at the home. We looked at care plans of the people who lived in the home and how other health and care professionals were consulted and involved with their care and support.

We saw that people were very happy with how they were treated and that they felt welcome and happy in the home.

A family member told us, “The care here is excellent, the staff are wonderful.”

A person who lived at the home told us, “I am very happy here.”

We saw that the Provider had clear staff recruitment practices in place. We found an open approach with good communication in place between the staff and the people who lived in the home and family members.

Effective practices meant that any comments and complaints were managed in accordance with the Complaints policy.

We also saw how the home dealt with information and records of the staff and people who lived at the home, with sensitive personal information managed and stored securely.

Inspection carried out on 12 April 2012

During a routine inspection

There were 26 people living at the service when we visited on 12 April 2012 and 19 April 2012.

We spoke with three people in residence and they told us they had received the support they needed. One person said, “the staff are very kind.” Another person told us that the home was “very good.”

One relative who was visiting told us the food was “excellent.” Another visitor told us that they could join in with the activities with their family member, such as DVD race nights and watching musical entertainers.

We used the Short Observational Framework for inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)