You are here

Archived: Meteor Rest Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 19 March 2016

The unannounced inspection took place on the 15 February 2016 and 16 February 2016.

Meteor Rest home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to a maximum of 15 people, some of whom may be diagnosed with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were fifteen people living in the service.

The service is required to and did have a 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.

Staff delivered support effectively and care was provided in a way that intended to promote people’s independence and wellbeing, whilst people’s safety was ensured. Staff were recruited and employed upon completion of appropriate checks as part of a robust recruitment process. Sufficient numbers of staff enabled people’s individual needs to be met adequately. Qualified staff dispensed medications and monitored people’s health satisfactorily.

Staff understood their responsibilities and how to keep people safe. People’s rights were also protected because management and staff understood the legal framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The registered manager and staff ensured access to healthcare services were readily available to people and worked with a range of healthcare professionals, such as social workers, community mental health nurses and GPs to implement care and support plans.

Staff were respectful and compassionate towards people ensuring privacy and dignity was valued. People were supported in a person centred way by staff who understood their roles in relation to encouraging independence whilst mitigating potential risks. People were supported to identify their own interests and pursue them with the assistance of staff. Person centred social activities took place within the service as well as in the community.

Systems were in place to make sure that people’s views were gathered. These included regular meetings, direct interactions with people and questionnaires being distributed to people, relatives and healthcare professionals. The service was assisted to run effectively by the use of quality monitoring audits the registered manager carried out, which identified any improvements needed. A complaints procedure was in place and had been implemented appropriately by the management team.

Inspection areas



Updated 19 March 2016

The service was safe.

People felt safe at the service. The provider�s arrangements ensured that staff were recruited safely and people were supported by sufficient staff to meet their needs and ensure their safety and wellbeing.

Staff at all levels had good knowledge on how to keep people safe.

Medication was managed and stored safely.



Updated 19 March 2016

The service was effective.

Management and staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty, which helped to ensure people�s rights were protected.

Staff received a suitable induction. People were cared for by staff that were appropriately trained to meet their needs. Staff felt supported in their role.

People had sufficient food and drink and experienced positive outcomes regarding their healthcare needs.



Updated 19 March 2016

This service was caring.

Staff were kind and treated people with dignity and respect.

Staff made efforts to seek people�s views about their care and took these into account when planning the care and support.

Staff communicated well with people in a variety of ways.



Updated 19 March 2016

The service was responsive.

Care was person centred and met people�s individual needs.

Care plans were individualised to meet people�s needs. There were varied activities to support people�s social care needs. Complaints and concerns were responded to in a timely manner.



Updated 19 March 2016

This service was well-led.

The service an open culture where staff and people living in the service were included and encouraged to participate in aspects of running of the service.

The registered manager had developed good links with the local community and local services.

The registered manager provided staff with appropriate leadership and support.

Staff and the registered manager worked effectively as a team to ensure that people�s needs were met.

The service had a number of quality monitoring processes in place to ensure the service maintained its standards.