• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Everley Residential Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

15 Lyde Green, Halesowen, West Midlands, B63 2PQ (01384) 566686

Provided and run by:
The Jethwa Partnership

All Inspections

20/10/2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 20 October 2014 and was unannounced. The last inspection on 14 October 2013 identified that the provider was fully compliant with all of the regulations we looked at. Everley Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 16 people who may have needs due to old age, physical disability or dementia. At the time of our inspection 13 people lived at the home. A registered manager was employed at 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.

Staff we spoke with understood that they had responsibility to take action to protect people from harm. They demonstrated awareness and recognition of abuse and systems were in place to guide them in reporting these. However, staff including senior staff lacked awareness of how to report issues to outside agencies in the absence of the manager.

People and their relatives consistently told us they were happy with the service provided and that staff understood their needs.

Staff understood how to manage the agitation of some people without the use of additional medication. Where specific precautions were needed to take medicines in a specific way, written details to support these practices were not always evident to guide staff to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely.

People were cared for by staff who knew them well and who they described as kind, caring, respectful and patient. We saw that staff respected and responded to people’s individual needs. However, people told us and we saw there was not enough staff to support them with recreational pastimes of their choice and opportunities for people with dementia were not fully apparent. We saw that there were some occasions where additional staff were needed to ensure they were able to respond to people’s behaviours that were causing alarm to others; a view shared by people and staff.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were detailed to provide guidance to staff to meet people’s needs. People were supported to access health care services and so received effective care that was based around their individual needs.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and report on what we find. The manager had undertaken training in this area to ensure she understood her role and responsibilities. However the provider had not followed the guidance where some people’s liberty had been restricted. No applications had been submitted to the supervisory body so that the decision to restrict somebody’s liberty is only made by people who had suitable authority to do so.

Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were well managed. They were supported to eat and drink well and had access to health professionals in a timely manner.

Staff were provided with training in order to develop the skills and knowledge to provide safe and appropriate care to people. Staff had access to regular support and supervision to ensure they could discuss their practice as well as their training needs. The provider had a rolling programme of training and we saw that refresher training was being booked.

The manager was open to managing people’s comments and complaints and people were confident these would be responded to. The views of people and their relatives had been regularly sought via meetings and surveys to obtain their feedback, and areas for improvement were being addressed.

The provider had a quality assurance process for monitoring and checking the quality of the service. Whilst some redecoration was evident to improve the premises, there were some environmental risks which had not been identified by the provider’s auditing and quality processes and could potentially compromise the safety of people. These related to harmful chemicals left unsecured, tools, rusted equipment and worn flooring.

We found a breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 in relation to the following; The requirements of DoLS. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

14 October 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with seven people using the service, two relatives, three staff, a visiting health care professional and a quality monitoring officer from the local authority. People using the service all made positive comments that included, "I have settled well, I would recommend it here" and "We are lucky to have such good staff". Visiting professionals were complimentary about the service and had no concerns.

We found that people who used the service had all been involved in planning their care and had given written consent before receiving care and treatment.

We saw that people's care records contained detailed information about their care needs and that they had access to a range of health care professionals. Care and treatment was planned in a way that ensured each person's health, safety and wellbeing.

We found that suitable arrangements were in place to protect people from abuse or harm. Staff had undertaken training in safeguarding and were aware of the procedures to be followed in the event of suspected abuse.

There was a system in place to ensure that people were protected against the risks associated with medicines. People received medicines safely and as prescribed.

We found that there had been adequate numbers of suitably trained and experienced staff on duty to meet people's needs. Two people using the service told us that they felt there had been sufficient numbers of staff on duty at all times.

.

20 March 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited Everley Residential Home to check progress on repairs to the property and replacement of worn and old furnishings. When we last inspected in January 2013 we found areas of the home were in need of repair and redecoration. This meant the provider had failed to take action to make sure people received care in an environment that iwas adequately maintained.

At our inspection in January 2013 we found a lack of formal supervision for both the manager and care staff. This meant the provider had not ensured people were cared for by staff who had the support they needed to meet people's needs. We also found that there was a lack of effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and identify where improvements to the decor and furnishings were needed.

At this inspection we found the provider had addressed the standards of decoration and ireplaced furnishings. We found people were cared for in a much improved environment.

The provider had addressed the shortfalls in formal staff supervision so that staff as well as the manager received the guidance and support they needed.

A more effective system was in place for monitoring the quality of the service; this included acting upon the complaints of people living there. One person told us, 'We've had some new chairs since you were here, they are spending some money and it is much nicer now'. Another person said, 'It was really tatty before, so much better now'.

2 January 2013

During a routine inspection

There were 13 people living at the home at the time of our inspection. We spoke with seven people, three staff, the cook, the manager, and provider. One person living there told us, "I am quite happy here, it's not too bad'.

Staff understood people's needs and personalities, and knew how to support people with specific needs, such as eating and drinking enough.

People's care plans show how risks to their health are met, such as fragile skin, and risk of weight loss. We saw people were supported to eat and drink enough. One person living there told us, 'The food is always very good and we always have a choice'.

The provider had continued to ensure repairs to the property were carried out, but there continued to be a lack of planned replacement of furnishings. This meant people continue to use arm chairs that are in a poor condition. A lack of a robust approach to renewal means that people do not live in a well maintained home.

Staff have the training they need so they can support the people living there safely. However regular supervision for both the manager and staff is not evident to ensure people's needs are being met.

Systems are in place to monitor the quality of the service, but these have not been fully effective in identifying where improvements are needed. The provider did not have plans in place for continuous improvements across the service.

26 April 2011

During a routine inspection

Three people who lived at the home agreed to speak with us. People living at the home told us that they were happy living there. We saw that staff were interacting well with people who lived at the home. Ensuring they were treated with respect. People told us that staff always asked them before they offer care and that staff respected their privacy and dignity. They told us they were able to visit the home before deciding to move in and that whilst living at the home they have been involved in different activities which they enjoy.

People told us that they had no reason to complain and if they had concerns they would raise them with the manager.

One person said: 'I am really happy living here and couldn't fault anything. The food is good.' Another person said: 'Staff are friendly and helpful and I am being cared for.'