Archived: Quintaville

Updated 9 March 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

We carried out an unannounced focussed inspection on the 15 February 2017. This inspection was carried out to check that improvements to meet legal requirements planned by the provider following our comprehensive inspection on the 13 &14 October 2016 had been made.

One adult social care inspector undertook the inspection. Prior to the inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to tell us about by law. We looked at the action plan the provider had sent, which told us what action they had taken following our comprehensive inspection in October 2016.

During the inspection, we focussed on one of the five key questions we ask about services: is the service effective? At our previous inspection, we rated this key question as requires improvement. This was because the service was not previously meeting legal requirements in relation to this area.

During the inspection, we spoke and met with three people who lived at the home. We looked at the care of four people to check they were receiving their care as planned. It was not possible to speak with some people in detail about their experiences of the service due to their complex care needs. We therefore used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who could not comment directly on the care they experienced.

We reviewed the staff training and supervision files for three care staff. We reviewed the quality of the care and support the home provided, as well as records relating to the management of the home. We spoke with two members of staff and the registered manager. We looked around the home and grounds which included some bedrooms (with people's permission). Following the inspection, we sought and received feedback from two health and social care professionals who had regular contact with the home.

Updated 9 March 2017

Quintaville provides accommodation and personal care for up to 20 people who may be living with a dementia, learning disability or have needs relating to their mental health. At the time of our inspection there were six people living at the home. Nursing care is not provided by the home. Where needed, this is provided by the community nursing team.

This unannounced inspection took place on the 15 February 2017, and was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Quintaville was previously inspected in October 2016, where we had identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Although staff had a good understanding of Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), people records did not reflect this. We also found some areas of the home were not hygienic and were in need of refurbishment. Following the inspection of October 2016, the provider wrote to tell us what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breaches we had identified.

We undertook this focused inspection on 15 February 2017, to check that the registered manager had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. On this inspection, we found improvements had been made and the provider was now meeting legal requirements. We have revised our rating to good for the key question of effective. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Quintaville on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

The home had 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.

At our previous inspection in October 2016, we found some areas of the home were not clean and were in need of refurbishment. At this inspection, we found improvements had been made. The registered manager had introduced hygiene checks, which staff carried out four times a day; this helped to ensure that people bedrooms, bathrooms and communal area of the home remained clean and tidy. Where we had previously identified areas of concern we saw action had been taken. For instance the person’s ensuite bathroom, which had previously been identified as unhygienic, had been completely refurbished.

During our previous inspection, we found that although the registered manager and staff showed a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People’s records did not reflect this for instance, where decisions had been made in people’s best interests these were not always being recorded. At this inspection, the registered manager confirmed that staff had received additional training and people’s records now contained mental capacity assessments and best interests decisions.

People said they felt safe and happy living at Quintaville. People looked well cared for, and we saw people were happy to be in the company of staff. Staff who had worked at the home for a number of years were knowledgeable about people’s needs and wishes and had the skills to support them. Records showed staff had undertaken an induction and received training in a variety of topics. These included safeguarding, mental capacity, first aid, pressure area care, moving handling, and food hygiene.

People told us they enjoyed the meals provided by the home. People were able to have their meals in the dining room, the lounge or in their own rooms if they wished. Where people required a soft or pureed diet, this was provided. Each food item was processed individually to enable people to continue to enjoy the separate flavours of their meals. We heard staff offering people choices during meal times and tea, coffee, and soft drinks were freely available.

People had access to a range of health care services and had regular contact with dentists, opticians, chiropodists, district nurses and GPs. Care records showed staff responded quickly to people’s needs.