Gracefield Nursing Home and Residential Care Home

We found the following examples of good practice:

A purpose-built log cabin had been installed in the home’s garden. This had been divided into two separate sections by a Perspex screen to allow people living in the home and their family members to visit each other safely.

Three pulse oximeters had been purchased by the provider and staff used these to measure residents’ oxygen levels twice a day.

The provider had purchased a specialist ultraviolet sterilising machine to enhance its usual cleaning routines.

Gracefield Nursing Home and Residential Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation, personal and nursing care to 15 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 17 people. The location is an adapted and extended single storey residential building and is located on the outskirts of the rural village of Dry Drayton near Cambridge.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Trained staff followed the systems in place to monitor and manage people’s risks and keep people safe from poor care and harm. Staff followed guidelines to prevent the spread of infection. Staff who had been trained and their competency checked, managed and administered people’s prescribed medicines safely.

Staff received training, supervisions and appraisals from the registered manager that developed their skills and knowledge. The provider and registered manager supported staff to develop through further training. Learning from recent dementia training had meant that the service was being redecorated to be more dementia friendly.

Staff treated the people they supported with kindness. People liked the staff that cared for them. Staff promoted and maintained people’s privacy and dignity. People enjoyed the activities that went on at the service. Links were established with the local community and relatives were encouraged to visit the service and attend special events such as festive parties being held.

People were supported to eat and drink enough amounts. People, where possible, were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff gave and respected people’s choices. Their preferences on how staff delivered their care was recorded in their care records for staff to follow. This included people’s end of life wishes.

The service was well managed by a registered manager. Staff were expected to provide a good-quality service to people. Staff used the governance systems in place such as audits and feedback, to monitor the quality of care being delivered to people. The owner of the service carried out visits to spot check the quality of the service provided.

People and their relatives were made aware of the complaints process should they need to use it. Stakeholders, people, their relatives and staff were given opportunities to give their view of the service and from this feedback action was taken to make any improvements.

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 registered manager and staff worked with external health professionals to make sure people’s well-being was promoted.

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 15 July 2017).

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.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff knew how to respond to possible abuse and how to reduce risks to people. There were enough staff who had been recruited properly to make sure they were suitable to work with people. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

People were cared for by staff who had received the appropriate training and had the skills and support to carry out their roles. Staff members understood and complied with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People received a choice of meals, which they liked, and staff supported them to eat and drink enough. They were referred to health care professionals as needed and staff followed the advice professionals gave them.

Staff were caring and kind and treated people with respect. People were listened to and were involved in their care and what they did on a day to day basis. People’s right to privacy was maintained by the actions and care given by staff members.

People’s personal and health care needs were met and care records guided staff in how to do this. There was a variety of activities for people to do and take part in during the day, and people had enough social stimulation. Complaints were investigated and responded to and people knew who to speak with if they had concerns.

Staff worked well together and felt supported by the management team. The monitoring process looked at systems throughout the home, identified issues and staff took the appropriate action to resolve these.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We saw that people were provided with support and care to meet their individual care, including nursing care, needs. People's level of independence was maintained and promoted and they were provided with individual recreational activities to maintain their sense of wellbeing. People's health was maintained because they were supported to access a range of health care services.

People's dietary needs and choices were catered for. People were offered a choice of what they would like to eat and drink and were supported with maintaining their hydration and nutritional needs.

The home was well-maintained and safe for people to live, work and visit. Work was in progress to improve the standard and quality of the current premises. A visitor told us that they felt the place to be, 'Homely.'

There were maintenance and checking systems in place to ensure that equipment was safe for people to use.

A complaints procedure was in place, which people's representatives had been made aware of. However, people were very satisfied with the standard and quality of the support, care and treatment and said that they had no cause to make a complaint.

We saw that improvements had been made to the premises. A new kitchen had been installed, together with a new bathroom and toilet. Flooring had been replaced in a number of the rooms. Staff told us, "The new bathrooms and kitchen have made a big difference".

People's care plans were reviewed regularly to ensure that changes were identified in a timely way. A relative told us, "I can't fault the care. Staff keep me informed on every aspect".

We saw that a wide range of activities were offered to people. One person told us, "Sometimes we have a drink and dinner at the pub". We saw people engaged with the reminiscence activity on the day of our visit.