Archived: Summerhayes Residential Home

This focused follow up inspection took place on 10 March 2017 and was unannounced. It was undertaken to check the service was effective and meeting the regulations in relation to consent and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

At our last inspection in July 2016, we found the regulations were breached in relation to the need for consent. People’s care records did not contain evidence of their consent to their care, and some relatives had consented to aspects of people’s care without the legal authority to do so. Where there was reason to believe people may have lacked the capacity to make decisions about their care, the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had not been followed. Mental capacity assessments had not been undertaken and, if appropriate, best interests decisions made in relation to this care. Some people lived with dementia and would not have been safe to leave the home without support from a member of staff, yet there had been no consideration of whether they were deprived of their liberty. No applications had been made to authorise this under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

The registered manager sent us an action plan dated 24 September 2016 that set out the actions the service would take in order to meet the regulations. This stated they would meet the regulations by 24 November 2016.

At this inspection in March 2017, we found improvements had been made. Actions were still in progress to meet the regulations in relation to consent and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The registered manager and deputy manager were in the process of meeting people and, where appropriate, their relatives to review their care and record their consent, or mental capacity assessments and best interests decisions. People told us care was only provided with their agreement.

The service had a registered manager, which is a condition of its registration with CQC. The registered manager had worked at the service for many years. 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 were supported to perform their roles effectively and safely, through training and regular supervision.

People were supported with their need for nutrition and hydration. They had a choice of meals and snacks and drinks were provided during the day. Staff were aware of people’s special dietary needs and these were catered for.

People’s health was monitored. Where they experienced any signs or symptoms of concern, these were referred to healthcare professionals such as doctors and district nurses.

Summerhayes Residential Home is registered to accommodate a maximum of 20 older people, without nursing needs. Accommodation is provided over two floors.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 the last inspection on 14 June 2013 the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations that were inspected at that time.

There were 17 people living at Summerhayes Residential Home at the time of our inspection. People who lived at the home, relatives and friends told us people felt safe and secure with staff to support them. People’s care and support needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. Care records contained details of people’s preferences, interests, likes and dislikes.

Staffing levels and the skills mix of staff were sufficient to meet the needs of people and keep them safe. The recruitment of staff had been undertaken through a thorough process. Pre-employment checks that were required had been completed prior to staff commencing work. This was confirmed by talking with staff members.

Medicines were being dispensed and administered in a safe manner. Staff responsible for administering medicines had received formal medicine training to ensure they were confident and competent to give medicines to people.

There were some shortfalls in obtained people’s consent as part of the care planning process. There were also shortfalls in acting in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had the knowledge, skills and experience to carry out their role. People told us that there were always staff available to help them when needed. Relatives of people who used the service told us that they visited the home at different times and on different days, and the staff always made them feel welcome. They said that staff were caring and treated people with respect, and that their relative was always comfortable and looked well cared for.

Staff were provided with relevant induction and training to make sure they had the right skills and knowledge for their role. Staff understood their role and what was expected of them. They were happy in their work, motivated and had confidence in the way the service was managed.

People had access to a range of health care professionals to help maintain their health. A varied and nutritious diet was provided to people. This took into account their dietary needs and preferences so that their health was promoted and choices respected.

People told us they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and felt confident they would be listened to.

People participated in a range of daily activities which were meaningful and promoted their independence.

There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Regular checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to.

People using the service and their relatives had been asked their opinion via surveys, the results of these had been audited to identify any areas for improvement.

On the day of our inspection there were 16 people living at Summerhayes Residential Home.

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found that care plans accurately reflected people's needs and had been drawn up with their involvement. People expressed satisfaction with the care they received and told us the staff were "very nice and caring". Another person told us, "The staff are good and I feel safe".

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

Records showed that there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

The provider had suitable quality assurance procedures in place to manage the health and welfare of people living in the home. People were able to comment on the service provided.

People living at Summerhayes were very positive about their experience of living at the home and no one had any complaints or concerns about how the home was run and managed. They told us that they had good relationships with the staff, who were described as 'brilliant'.

They told us that the home was kept clean. They told us that there was a range of food and drinks available. There were activities arranged to keep people occupied. People told us that they were involved in decisions about how they were looked after and that they could choose when they got up and when they went to bed.