You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 August 2018

The inspection took place on 10 and 14 May 2018 and was unannounced.

Greenways 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 home provides accommodation, for up to 44 older people, who are living with dementia and who require support with their personal care or nursing care needs. On the day of our inspection there were 38 people living at the home. The home is purpose built. Corridors and doorways provide space for people with mobility needs who use wheelchairs, as well as other equipment, to move around the home. A passenger lift is provided so people could access the first and second floor. All bedrooms are single and have an en suite toilet. The accommodation is divided into five units over three floors; each with its own lounge and dining room with a small kitchen. There is a main lounge area and accessible gardens with tables and chairs for people to use.

At the last inspection on 3 and 7 November 2016 we found the service was in breach of three regulations. We found the service did not provide sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. We made a requirement notice regarding this and the provider sent us an action plan of how they would be addressing this. At this inspection we found improvements had been to the staffing levels which had increased and were in sufficient numbers to meet people’s needs. This regulation was now met.

At the last inspection of 3 and 7 November 2016 we found the provider had not ensured the home was adequately cleaned so unpleasant odours were eliminated. We made a requirement notice regarding this and the provider sent us an action plan of how they would be addressing this. At this inspection we found the home was clean and hygienic and there were no offensive odours. This regulation was now met.

At the last inspection of 3 and 7 November 2016 we found the provider did not have adequate systems to monitor and improve the quality of the services it provided. This included a previous requirement regarding the safe management of medicines not being fully implemented as well as the provider failing to send an action plan as required. We made a requirement notice regarding this and the provider sent us an action plan of how they would be addressing this. At this inspection we found improvements had been made to the quality assurance in the home. This requirement was now met.

We made a recommendation in the last report regarding the provider being able to demonstrate people had a preference regarding the gender of staff who provided personal care, and, whether they wished to have a key to their bedroom. The provider sent us an action plan of how they were to address this. At this inspection we found these preferences were asked of people and recorded in the care records.

There service 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.

Staff had a good awareness of their responsibilities to protect people in their care and for reporting any concerns. People said they received a good standard of care.

Risks to people were assessed and care plans devised to mitigate these.

Staff recruitment procedures ensured only staff who were suitable to work in a care setting were employed.

Medicines were safely managed.

The premises were purpose built, safe and well maintained. Equipment was available for people who were living with dementia to interact with independently, which helped improve the quality of their life. People had personalised their rooms.

There were systems to review people

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 August 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people were assessed and guidance was in place to mitigate these.

The service had policies and procedures on safeguarding people from possible abuse. Staff knew what to do if they suspected any abuse had occurred.

Sufficient numbers of staff were provided to meet people�s needs. Checks were made that newly appointed staff were suitable to work in care.

Medicines were safely managed.

The home was found to be clean, hygienic and free from any offensive odours.

People�s care was reviewed and incidents were monitored and action taken to make improvements.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 August 2018

The service was Effective.

Staff had access to current guidance and training regarding care procedures. Staff were supported by a range of training and supervision.

People were supported to eat and there was choice of varied and nutritious meals.

Healthcare needs were monitored and people were supported to access health care services.

The service is purpose built and is suited to meeting the needs of people.

People were consulted about their care and the provider followed the guidance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) where people did not have capacity to consent to their care and treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 August 2018

The service was caring.

People received care from staff who were kind and caring. Staff promoted people�s rights to choice, privacy and independence.

People were consulted and involved in decisions about their care.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 1 August 2018

The service was not always responsive.

People�s views and concerns were listened to and acted on. The service had a complaints procedure and complaints were acted on and complainants responded to. We identified one complaint was not fully recorded which was rectified during the inspection.

Staff responded promptly when people used their call point to ask for assistance although we found on one occasion this was not the case.

People received personalised care which was responsive to their needs. Activities were provided and people had opportunities to make suggestions about this.

Whilst there were no people in receipt of end of life care, staff training and care records showed the service had policies for palliative care.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 August 2018

The service was Well Led.

There was an inclusive culture where staff, people and relatives were involved and consulted about care and how the home operated.

There was registered manager and team of senior staff to coordinate care. The home was supported and monitored by the provider�s regional management team.

The safety and quality of the service was effectively checked and audited.

The provider worked well with other agencies including health and social care services.