• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Foxton Grange

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

571 Gipsy Lane, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE5 0TA (0116) 246 0616

Provided and run by:
Methodist Homes

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 22 May 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors, a specialist nurse advisor and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. In this instance their area of expertise was caring for family members living with dementia.

Service and service type:

Foxton Grange is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Foxton Grange accommodates up to 36 people in purpose built single storied building. The building was divided in to two areas, one providing care for people living with dementia and had nursing care needs.

At the time of the inspection the service did not have 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. The registered manager had left the service and deregistered from 23 January 2019.The provider was in the process of recruiting a new manager who would then apply to be registered with the CQC. There was an area support manager and acting deputy manager managing the day to day running of the service overseen and supported by an area manager.

Notice of inspection:

This was an unannounced inspection.

What we did:

We reviewed the information we had about the service which included any notifications that had been sent to us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We contacted the health and social care commissioners who monitor the care and support the people receive.

Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send to us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well an improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection, we spoke with four people living in the home and five relatives. We also had discussions with 14 members of staff that included care and nursing staff, an activities co-ordinator, a housekeeper, a maintenance person, a cook, the acting deputy manager, support manager and area manager.

We observed care and support in communal areas including lunch being served. The people who used the service lived with a dementia related illness and so some of them could not describe their views of what the service was like; we undertook observations of care and support being given. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the care records of people who used the service, we undertook a tour of the premises and observed information on display around the service such as information about safeguarding, activities and how to make a complaint. We also examined records in relation to the management of the service such as staff recruitment files, quality assurance checks, staff training and supervision records, safeguarding information and accidents and incident information.

Following the inspection, the provider sent us details of a Quality Assessment of the home undertaken by the provider’s Quality Dir

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 22 May 2019

About the service: Foxton Grange is a care home that was providing personal and nursing care to 27 people living with dementia aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿There had been several different managers since our last inspection in 2016 which had impacted on the stability of the home and staff morale.

¿Action plans to address shortfalls identified through the systems in place to monitor the quality and performance of the service, had not always been completed in a timely way.

¿Care plans needed to be improved to enable staff to provide care in a more person-centred way.

¿Complaints had not always been addressed within the timescales laid down in the providers policy.

¿Staff were friendly, passionate about their work and caring; they treated people with respect, kindness, dignity and compassion.

¿People developed positive relationships with staff.

¿People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

¿Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs.

¿ Staff had access to the support, supervision and training that they required to work effectively in their roles.

¿People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

¿Staff knew their responsibilities as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). The provider was aware of how to make referrals if people lacked capacity to consent to aspects of their care and support and were being deprived of their liberty.

¿Information was provided to people in an accessible format to enable them to make decisions about their care and support.

¿The service met the characteristics for a rating of “good” in three of the five key questions we inspected and rating of “requires improvement” in two. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was “requires improvement”.

More information is in the full report

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 16 September 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. 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