You are here

Stanbeck Residential Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 June 2017

This comprehensive inspection took place on 11 April 2017 and was unannounced. We last inspected Stanbeck Residential Care Home in May 2016. At that inspection we found four breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and a breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. At this inspection we found that the provider had complied with the requirement notices in relation to those breaches.

Stanbeck Residential Care Home is situated in a residential area of Workington. It is approximately half a mile from the centre of town and is on a bus route serving the town centre. The home has a large garden and patio areas and provides accommodation for up to 13 older people. Bedrooms, accessible by a lift or stairs, are for single occupancy with ensuite toilet facilities. There is a dining room on the first floor that leads out to a patio and a lounge is on the ground floor with direct access to the garden.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the (CQC) 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.

During the inspection we saw there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet people’s needs and promote people’s safety.

Where safeguarding concerns or incidents had occurred these had been reported by the registered manager to the appropriate authorities and we could see records of the actions taken by the home to protect people.

When employing fit and proper persons the recruitment procedures of the provider had usually been followed. However we saw for one person recently employed that one of the checks the provider usually completed had not been done in line with the company’s procedures.

We saw medicines were being administered and recorded appropriately and were being kept safely. However we found that supporting information or ‘protocols’ were not made clear to guide staff to administer medicines which were prescribed to be given “when required” or as a “variable dose”. Clear guidance is needed to help ensure people are given these medicines safely.

We have made a recommendation that written protocols for staff to follow would help ensure people are given these medicines safely and in the way they were prescribed.

People’s rights were protected. The staff team were knowledgeable about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were only deprived of their liberty if this had been authorised by the appropriate body or where applications had been made to and was required to maintain their safety and welfare.

Staff had completed training that enabled them to improve their knowledge in order to deliver care and support safely.

People were supported to maintain good health and appropriate referrals to other healthcare professionals were made.

We observed staff displayed caring and meaningful interactions with people and people were treated with respect. We observed people’s dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them. People living in and visiting the home spoke highly of the staff and told us they were very happy with their care and support.

There was a clear management structure in place and staff were happy with the level of support they received.

People living in the home were supported to access activities and pass times of their choice.

Auditing and quality monitoring systems were in place that allowed the service to demonstrate effectively the safety and quality of the home.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 8 June 2017

The service was not always safe.

Prescribed medicines were stored safely and managed safely but guidance for as required medicines was not always recorded.

Checks of suitability were made usually in line with the provider’s policies to ensure that people being employed were fit and proper persons.

People told us they were safe and very well cared for in this home.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 June 2017

The service was effective.

People said they thoroughly enjoyed the meals provided and appropriate assessments relating to nutritional requirements had been made.

Consent to care and treatment had been obtained involving where required appropriate others.

Staff had received the relevant training to fulfil their roles.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 June 2017

The service was caring.

People told us that they were being well cared for and we saw that the staff were respectful and friendly in their approaches.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge about the people they were supporting, their likes and dislikes.

We saw that staff maintained people's personal dignity when assisting them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 June 2017

The service was responsive.

We saw there were some activities which people took part in.

People and relatives felt able to speak with staff or the management team about any concerns they had.

Care plans and records showed that people were seen by appropriate professionals when required to meet their physical and mental health needs.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 June 2017

The service was well led.

There were adequate processes in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.

Staff told us they felt supported and listened to by the registered manager.

People living at the service and their relatives were able to give their views and take part in meetings and discussions about the service.