We carried out a review of the data available to us about Quinton 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 Quinton House, you can give feedback on this service.
Quinton House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 27 people. The service provides support to older and younger adults including people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 16 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The registered manager was very visible within the home and took time to listen and engage with people. There was a culture of equality and diversity which staff echoed in their comments. In recognition of the importance of protecting and promoting staff wellbeing and positive mental health, the provider trained two staff as mental health well-being champions.
Improvements had been made to governance and clinical oversight. New systems and processes of governance, quality and safety improved clinical oversight and monitoring of the service. There was a real drive, passion and commitment from leadership to continuous improvement within the service and people’s outcomes. The clinical manager was being trained as a student nurse assessor with Coventry University, so the service could provide placements for student nurses.
Actions were taken, and lessons learnt in response to any accidents and incidents that occurred. One staff member told us they were confident to report any errors because of the no blame culture within the home.
Staff understood the importance of safeguarding people and their responsibilities to report any concerns. At the last inspection, risks to people were not always identified or managed. This included risks associated with allergies and catheter care and environmental hazards. At this inspection improvements had been made.
Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were assessed, well managed and reviewed at regular intervals, or following a change in need. Medicines were ordered, stored and administered safely. There were enough staff to provide safe and effective care and we were assured by the provider's infection control practices. The home followed government guidance in relation to visiting and there were no restrictions on people having visitors to the home.
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.
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 requires improvement (published 9 November 2021). At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer requires improvement.
Why we inspected
We undertook this focused inspection based on the current rating to identify if the service had made improvements. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good based on the findings of this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Quinton House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Quinton House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care for 14 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The care home accommodates 27 people in one adapted building, including people living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We found some risks to people’s health and safety in relation to the environment and clinical care had not always been identified or actions taken to manage them. Wardrobes were not fitted to the walls and some were unstable. Actions to mitigate the risk of one person experiencing allergic reactions had not been taken.
A new team of managers had recently been employed, each of whom had an area of quality and safety in care to focus on. Improvements to assessment, care planning, clinical care management and governance had been identified by the team with new quality assurance systems underway. However, time was needed to allow these new systems to embed and provide robust oversight, monitoring and review of quality and safety in Quinton House.
People received their medications as prescribed and the electronic medication recording system supported the safe monitoring of people’s medication, to minimise the risk of errors. Training provided staff with the knowledge they needed to identify and report safeguarding concerns. Where accidents and incidents occurred, these were reported, recorded and analysed to learn and reduce the risk of them happening again.
Staff were provided with a range of online and face to face, specialised training and there was a focus on staff development by the new clinical management team. Staff received supervision to identify gaps in learning and ensure they remained up to date with best practice. Effective communication took place within the service to ensure people were supported safely with their meals and drinks. When changes in people’s health were noticed, the provider worked closely with other health professionals to ensure their care remained suitable. 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 were supported by staff who were compassionate, empathetic and knowledgeable about the people they cared for. Staff enjoyed working at the home and described it as “a family”. We observed kind, friendly and caring relationships between staff and people who lived at Quinton House and feedback we received about care staff was positive. Staff understood how to promote people’s privacy and dignity. There were framed photographs on the walls of people who lived at the home. People’s bedrooms were personal to them, spacious and had plenty of natural light.
People were supported to make decisions regarding their care and relatives were involved where appropriate to ensure assessments and care planning was personalised. During our inspection entertainment was provided and the provider was in the process of making improvements to activities to make them more varied. There was a large garden for people to enjoy, which was well maintained. Recent improvements included a new kitchen area where people could bake, a new cinema screen, and a bar.
The provider worked closely with local community groups. Three new members of management had recently joined the team at Quinton House and were working to make improvements to quality assurance systems, quality and safety at the home. People were encouraged to give feedback about care through online review forums and the introduction of ‘smiley face’ questions in feedback forms was implemented to provide a visual aid and make it easier for people to give feedback.
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 4 November 2017).
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
Quinton House is a three storey nursing and residential home which provides nursing care to older people including people who are living with dementia. Quinton House is registered to provide care for 27 people and at the time of our inspection, there were 18 people living at Quinton House.
At the last inspection on 1 September 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection, the service continues to be rated Good. Since the last inspection the provider had made a lot of improvements to the service and was working towards a possible ‘outstanding’ rating in the future.
There was no registered manager in post. The registered manager left the service on 15 September 2017. 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. The provider told us they were in the process registering with us to become the registered manager themselves.
We received some extremely positive feedback from people who lived at Quinton House, and their relatives, about the staff who cared for them and the support from the provider. People told us they were very happy with the care they received. They said staff were, excellent, extremely caring and had made a positive difference to how they lived their lives.
Care and nursing staff were highly motivated to provide a good service to the people they supported. Staff sought people’s consent, regardless of their capacity and provided additional support to some people who had health conditions that had deteriorated over time. People's right to make their own decisions about their care, were supported by staff who understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
People received care which protected them from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff had completed training in safeguarding people and knew how to recognise and respond to abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified and assessments were in place to manage identified risks. Staff received training to support people to take their medicines as prescribed.
The provider took appropriate steps to recruit staff of good character and recruited staff who shared their same passions and philosophy of providing good standards of care.
People were involved in the planning of their care, and care plans focused on the individual’s preferences and how they would like their care delivered. Detailed guidance was provided to staff about how to provide all areas of the care and support people needed. People’s care and support needs were kept under review and staff responded when there were changes in these needs.
The service remained responsive to people’s needs and wishes. People were provided with care and support that was individual to them. Staff respected people's privacy, dignity and continued to promote their independence, which people valued.
People received meals and drinks that met their individual dietary requirements. Anyone identified at risk of malnutrition or dehydration, were monitored over a period of time so if concerns were identified, advice and treatment could be requested.
People were encouraged to raise concerns and make complaints and they were confident these would be listened to and responded to promptly. The management team used feedback from people to assist them in making improvements to the service.
Staff told us they were very happy in their work and they received excellent support from an experienced management team, who were always available to give advice. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and had regular supervision and observations of their practice to make sure they carried these out safely.
Feedback from people and their representatives were continually sought and used as an opportunity for improving the service people received. There continued to be effective and responsive processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service provided.
There was a clearly defined management structure which the provider had increased since our previous inspection. The management team worked well together and were committed to providing a high quality service to people. The provider had a clear vision for the development of the service and demonstrated a commitment to implement best practice and improved technology to drive improvements. The provider and staff were passionate about delivering a good service and were working towards providing an outstanding service.
Before they left the service, the registered manager had submitted a Provider Information return (PIR) to us and they and the provider understood their legal responsibility to notify of us of important and serious incidents.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 1 September 2015 and was unannounced.
Quinton House is a three storey residential home which provides care to older people including people who are living with dementia. Quinton House is registered to provide care for 27 people and at the time of our inspection, there were 19 people living at Quinton House.
At the time of our inspection a registered manager was not in post although the provider had arranged for two deputy managers to manage the home in the interim. The provider had appointed a manager who planned to start the end of September 2015. 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.
All the people we spoke with told us they felt well cared for and safe living at Quinton House. People told us staff were respectful and kind towards them and staff were caring and empathetic to people throughout our visit. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity when they provided care and staff asked people for their consent before any care or support was provided.
Care plans contained accurate and relevant information for staff to help them provide the individual care and treatment people required. Care records reflected people’s wishes and how they preferred their care to be delivered. Risk assessments provided information for staff to keep people safe and these were reviewed to ensure they continued to protect people from risk. People received support from staff who had the knowledge to care for them and people’s personal and confidential information was kept safe and secure.
People told us they received their medicines when required. Staff were trained to administer medicines and had been assessed as competent, which meant people received their medicines from suitably trained and experienced staff.
The provider had effective recruitment procedures that helped protect people. All the necessary checks had been completed on potential staff before a decision was made to employ them at the home.
Staff understood the need to respect people’s choices and decisions. Assessments had been made and reviewed to determine people’s individual capacity to make certain decisions. Where people did not have capacity, decisions had been taken in ‘their best interests’ with the involvement of family members and appropriate health care professionals.
The provider was meeting their requirements set out in the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager had contacted the local authority and submitted applications to make sure people’s freedoms and liberties were not restricted unnecessarily. At the time of this inspection, three applications had been authorised under DoLS
Staff were caring and compassionate in their approach to people. People were given choices about how they wanted to spend their day so they were able to retain some independence in making day to day decisions about their everyday life. Staff encouraged relatives to maintain an active role in providing support to their family member.
A variety of activities were provided for people living in the home that promoted their health and wellbeing. Staff involved in providing activities were enthusiastic and encouraged the wider community to be involved.
There was an audit system that identified and improved the quality of service people received. These checks and audits helped ensure actions had been taken that led to improvements. People told us they were pleased with the service they received and if they suggested improvements, these were acted upon. People’s concerns were listened to and supported by the provider and staff who responded in a timely way.
We looked at the care records for three people who lived at the home and other supporting documents. People that we spoke with were very satisfied with the care they had received. One person said: 'You couldn't come to a better home'.
We found consent had been obtained from people before care and treatment had been provided. Staff we spoke with told us they respected people's individual choices. One staff member said: 'I always offer a choice and respect what people want'.
We found people received care and support as planned inaccordance with their needs. Staff understood people's individual needs and how to give the support that they required.
People were cared for in a safe and clean environment. The premises were suitable for people who had limited mobility.
We found that the provider supported their staff and made sure staff were trained to an appropriate standard to meet people's needs. The provider held regular supervisions with staff.
People received information on how to make a complaint if they were not happy with the service. We found that the provider had received complaints and had dealt with them to people's satisfaction.
All the people we spoke with said they liked living at the home. Four people said 'the home had been and was going through a lot of changes which had been unsettling'. People spoke about the building work and some carers leaving.
Staff said the home was a 'very nice place to work with lots of opportunities to improve and gain skills'. People said they 'liked the staff and felt safe at the home'. People said they 'liked the food, were offered a good variety of foods at meal times plus a choice of small or large meals'.
Staff at the home and people using the service said they was a choice of activities including trips into the local community. One relative said 'since the new manager had been at the home his wife had been coming out of her room'. He said this had helped her as she was more stimulated; 'her memory had improved and she was not so confused'.
People said they felt able to approach the staff or manager with any concerns. They said they were aware of the complaints system and comments or concerns had been responded to appropriately. People said they had been able to express their views in forums such as the residents meeting and through individual discussions with the staff.