Archived: Strand House Residential Care Home

Updated 28 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type

Strand House 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 service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

What we did: Before the inspection, we reviewed relevant information we had about the service, including any notifications of safeguarding or incidents affecting the safety and wellbeing of people. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We checked the last inspection report and contacted the local authority for information.

The service completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). A PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what it does well and any improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection, we spoke with five people living at the home, a staff member and the registered manager. Some people using the service were living with dementia or illnesses that limited their ability to tell us about their experience of living there. We would normally complete a Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not speak with us and share their experience fully. However, one person became anxious during the lunchtime meal, so we made the decision not to observe people’s mealtime experience.

We reviewed three people’s care records, including assessments, staff files, records of accidents/ incidents, audits and quality assurance records.

Updated 28 September 2019

Strand House is a residential care home providing personal care to eight people aged 65 and over. During our inspection, seven people were living at the home, although one person was in hospital. Several people were staying on a short stay basis to recuperate or because of their family circumstances. The registered manager and provider lived on the premises.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People’s experience of using this service:

People were extremely positive about their experience of living at the home. For example, one person described Strand House as “a very comfortable, pleasant home living up to its good name."

People said they felt safe because of the quality of care and the small size of the home. Staffing levels delivered responsive support to people. People received their medicines on time and staff were quick to respond to changes in their health and well-being. People were protected from abuse because staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities. Care staff were recruited to suit the caring values of the service. They recognised the importance of team work to provide consistent and safe care. The home was well maintained, clean, and staff had access to protective equipment to protect people from the risk of infections.

There was a stable and attentive staff group; a person said, “I can’t fault them.” People were supported by staff who respected their privacy and dignity. Staff relationships with the people they assisted was caring and reassuring.

Staff received training throughout their employment to ensure they had the skills to provide effective care. People’s care needs were regularly reviewed. Referrals were appropriately made to health care services when people’s needs changed. Risk assessments identified when people could be at risk. They covered people's physical and mental health needs and the environment they lived in. People's nutritional needs were met, and people socialised as they ate their meal in a relaxed atmosphere.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. Information was in place to ensure people’s legal rights were protected.

There were systems in place which enabled the registered manager to monitor the quality of care. For example, through reviews and surveys. Feedback from people using and visiting the service showed this approach had been effective. For example, a relative said, "Just keep doing, what you are doing. It's the best."

Rating at last inspection (and update):

The last rating for this service was Good (published March 2017). At this inspection, the rating remained the same.

Why we inspected: This inspection was scheduled for follow up based on the last report rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about the service. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk