You are here

The Steppes Residential Care Home Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 7 April 2018

This inspection took place on the 30 and 31 January 2018 and was unannounced.

We found two breaches of legal requirement at the last inspection in October 2016 relating to incomplete care records and medicine management. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions Safe and Responsive to at least good. The provider had followed their action plan which they said would be completed on 9 February 2017. We found there were improvements to the care plans and the medicine management. People had received their medicines as prescribed. However, further improvements were needed to ensure people’s medicines would always be managed in accordance with current best practice. We have made a recommendation that the service consider current guidance on medicine management

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

The Steppes accommodates 29 people in two adapted adjacent houses. There were 28 people accommodated when we visited. Ten people were accommodated in The Lodge and 18 people in The Steppes main house.

At our last inspection we rated the service Requires Improvement. At this inspection we found the service was rated Good.

There was 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.

We found improvements had been made to people’s care plans. There was a new detailed care planning system and people’s individual care was recorded and reviewed monthly to ensure they were safe and well. Staff knew what people valued and how they liked to be supported. Healthcare professionals supported people when required.

We found improvements to infection control in the laundry. There was a new sluice room and staff ensured infection control procedures were followed.

People lived in a safe and well maintained home and staff knew how to keep people safe. People told us they felt the home was safe. Staff were trained to identify and report any safety concerns. People were supported by staff that were well trained and had regular supervision to support their personal development.

People were treated with kindness and compassion and we observed staff engaged with people positively to support their wellbeing. People were treated with respect and they were supported to be independent. They were able to make choices and decisions and staff supported them.

People had a range of activities to choose from which included exercise classes, arts and crafts, musical entertainments, bingo and walks into town. There were links with the local community with trips out regularly organised.

The services quality assurance systems had improved. Regular audits had been completed and action plans ensured improvements were made. People and their relatives completed surveys about the home and action was taken to improve the service.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 7 April 2018

This service was not consistently safe.

People had received their medicines as prescribed. However, further improvements were needed to ensure people�s medicines would always be managed in accordance with current best practice.

Infection control measures had improved and people�s laundry was managed in a safe and clean environment.

Deployment of staff had improved and there were sufficient staff to meet people�s needs.

People were safeguarded as staff were trained to recognise

abuse and to report any abuse.

People were protected by thorough recruitment practices.



Updated 7 April 2018

The service was effective.

We found improvements in people�s dining experience when they no longer waited between courses for their food and were adequately supervised. People's dietary requirements and food preferences were met.

People were supported by staff who received supervision in their role and had sufficient training.

People made most decisions and choices about their care. When people did not have the capacity to make decisions staff followed the Mental Capacity Act (2005) guidance.

People had access to social and healthcare professionals and their health and welfare was monitored by them.



Updated 7 April 2018

The service was caring.

We found improvements in communicating with people and respecting their privacy.

People were treated with compassion and kindness.

Staff engaged with people effectively and promoted their independence.

People bedrooms were personalised with their own mementoes.



Updated 7 April 2018

The service was responsive.

We found improvements in peoples care plans had been made. A new format with more detailed information was in use and reviewed monthly.

We found the complaints procedure was updated and people had a copy to refer to. People�s concerns were responded to.

People took part in a range of activities and had individual engagement with staff.



Updated 7 April 2018

The service was well led.

We found improvements in the quality assurance procedures and the registered manager had identified where improvements could be made. Action was taken when shortfalls were identified.

Staff were well supported and were able to influence improvements to the service.

People attended regulars meetings and their requests were actioned to improve their daily lives.

The registered manager and provider were approachable with relatives, staff and people.