We carried out a review of the data available to us about St Mary's House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about St Mary's House, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People continued to receive a good service. People described kind and caring staff who knew them well and supported them to remain as independent as possible. One person told us, “I am thankful everyday to be living here. The staff are so kind and caring.”
People said they felt safe living at the home. Systems and processes supported staff to provide care in a safe way and in line with legislation and guidance. Risks to people were identified and managed. People received their medicines safely and there were enough suitable staff to care for people safely.
People said they enjoyed the food at St Mary’s House and their needs and choices were respected. People were receiving the support they needed to have enough to eat and drink. Staff ensured that people were able to access health care services when they needed them.
Staff received the training and support they needed to care for people and demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences. 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; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People’s dignity and privacy was respected, and staff supported people to express their views and to be involved in making decisions. Staff knew people well and provided care in a personalised way that was responsive to their needs. People were supported to plan for care at the end of life. People knew how to complain and were confident that their views would be listened to.
There was clear leadership and staff understood their roles. Communication systems supported effective team work. People and staff spoke highly of the management of the home. There were effective systems to monitor the quality of the service and the registered manager retained oversight. There was a positive culture that supported openness and learning from mistakes.
Staff had developed close relationships with people and there was a homely atmosphere. One person told us, “Living here, I am as happy as I have ever been in my life.”
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 17 August 2018).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The home had a registered manager in post. They were not present on the day of the inspection but the provider’s Director of Care was at the home. 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 9 April 2015 we identified some areas of practice that were not consistently safe. At this inspection we found that these concerns had been addressed and were now meeting the required standards. Staff were clear about their responsibilities with regard to keeping people safe and risks were identified, assessed and managed effectively.
People were receiving their medicines and there were enough staff on duty to care for people safely. One person told us, “I feel safe all the time, the carers look after me.” A relative said, “I know I can leave my dad here and not worry at all, I have no concerns for his welfare”.
Staff were receiving the training and support they needed to carry out their roles effectively. People had confidence in the skills of the staff and felt they were well trained. One person said, “They always seem to be training for something, so I’m very happy they can look after me”. Staff had a clear understanding of their responsibilities with regard to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2015 and sought consent from people before providing care. People were supported to access the health and care services they needed.
People were receiving the food and drink they needed. They spoke very highly of the standard of the food at St Mary’s House. One person said, “Food is very good, of top hotel standard,” another person said, “The food is excellent, (the chef) could leave and open her own restaurant.”
People and their relatives told us they were very happy with the care they received. They spoke highly of the staff, describing positive relationships and a kind and caring approach. One person said, “I love the staff, they look after me well, and are interested in what I say.” Staff treated people with respect and maintained their privacy and dignity. People told us they had been involved in planning their care and felt that their views were listened to.
There was a range of activities organised on a daily basis and people told us that they enjoyed participating. Staff encouraged and supported people to follow their interests and to maintain relationships that were important to them. One person had given up art but staff persuaded them to try taking it up again and they were participating in the art class regularly. They told us they, “Really love the class.” There was a complaints system and people knew how to raise any concerns. They said they would feel comfortable to do so but had not needed to do so.
People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the management of the home. One person said, “I cannot think of anything that could be improved, they do an excellent job, they do everything well.” A relative said, “I honestly can’t praise it enough. The staff respect each other and work as a team all the time.” A staff member said, “I think it’s very well led. I wouldn’t have stayed here so long if I thought differently.” There were effective governance systems to provide oversight, to monitor the quality of the care and to drive improvements. The visions and values of the service were embedded within practice and staff had developed positive links within the local community.
We inspected St Mary’s House on the 9 and 10 April 2015. St Mary’s House is a residential care home that provides care and support for up to 22 people. On the days of the inspection, 17 people were living at the home. The age range of people varied between 70 – 100 years old. St Mary’s House provides support for people living with varying stages of dementia, diabetes, mental health needs and long term healthcare conditions.
In 1954, St Mary’s House was founded by Mother Mary Garson. Mother Mary Garson was motivated by compassion for some old people she visited who were living in squalid conditions unable to look after themselves. She felt compelled to do something about this situation and set up St Mary’s House in Brighton where people could be cared for in a loving surrounding. Receiving the anonymous gift of exactly the money she required for the deposit on a house convinced her that this was God’s will for her. In 1978, St Mary’s House became part of the Grace and Compassion Benedictine family (provider).
Grace and Compassion Benedictine family follow the rule of St Benedict who lived in the 5th century. The rule is centred on Christ and aims at a balanced life of serenity and wholeness. The main work of the Benedictine family is hospitality particularly in the care of the old, the sick and the poor. The home is run by Sisters and care staff who work alongside one another. Next door to the home is the Sisters convent. A chapel is on also on site which is open to the public on Sundays.
A registered manager was in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People’s needs had been assessed and individual holistic care plans developed. However, where someone was assessed at being high risk of falls or skin breakdown, documentation failed to reflect what actions were required to safely meet the person’s needs or reduce the risk of any harm occurring. Despite concerns with documentation, we saw that people received the care they required. However, we have identified this as an area of practice that needs improvement.
Staff had received safeguarding adults training and had a firm understanding of what constituted adult abuse. However, staff were not clear on how to raise a safeguarding concern. We have identified this as an area of practice that needs improvement.
People who lived at the home and their relatives were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the home to make sure improvements were made when needed.
The Sisters and care staff referred people to other health professionals for advice and support when their health needs changed. Staff supported people with kindness and compassion. Staff reassured and encouraged people in a way that respected their dignity and promoted their independence. Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people before delivering personal care.
People and their relatives felt people were safe and well cared for. People were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff. New staff received induction, training and support from experienced members of staff. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and spoke highly of their leadership style.
Staff offered people a wide range of choices for meals. Risks to people’s nutrition were minimised because staff understood the importance of offering appetising meals that were suitable for people’s individual dietary needs.
Medicines were stored in line with legal requirements and people commented they received their medicines on time. People’s social and emotional needs were met through a range of social activities and opportunities for social engagement. Staff understood and recognised people’s religious and spiritual needs and provided support to ensure those beliefs were upheld and maintained.
We saw that people experienced safe and effective care based on detailed care plans and risk assessments that met individual needs.
People using the service were protected from abuse as they were supported by a staff team who had appropriate knowledge and training in safeguarding adults. People told us that if they had any concerns they would report them to the manager.
Staff we spoke with and records we reviewed, demonstrated that staff were suitably experienced and skilled to support people living in the home. A staff member told us that they 'enjoy the work' and that the manager is 'helpful and understanding'.
The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service.
The people we spoke with were happy living at St Mary's House. hey told us that they were able to make choices about the care they received, and that staff looked after them well. One person said "It's very good here", and another said "I always say I feel content here". The visitor we spoke with said that their relative received good care at the home.
The staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the needs of the people who lived at the home, and received the training and support they needed. They prioritised the privacy and dignity of people, and supported people to be independent.
We spent time observing the care provided to people living in the home. We saw that staff had a good rapport with people, and spent time talking and listening to them. Staff understood people's needs well. There was a friendly, happy atmosphere in the home.
The manager said that the house had been refurbished over the last two years. The house and people's rooms were clean and well-presented. There were effective systems for assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision in place.