You are here

Cumbria House Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The inspection took place on 1 August 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

Cumbria House Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and 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. Cumbria House Care Home provides accommodation and support for up to 32 older people. There were 24 people living at the service at the time of our inspection. People had varying care needs. Some people were living with dementia, some people had diabetes or had Parkinson’s disease, some people required support with their mobility around the home and others were able to walk around independently.

A registered manager was employed at the service by the provider. 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 our last inspection on 5 July 2017, the service was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’. We found a breach of Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Peoples preferences and requirements around their food and how this was delivered was not always person centred. We also made a recommendation to the provider that they provide better evidence of their oversight of all aspects of service delivery. At this inspection we found the provider and registered manager had made the necessary improvements to meet the regulations and achieve a rating of ‘Good’.

People were now complimentary about the food and snacks available. There was variety and choice at mealtimes. People told us they had access to plenty of drinks throughout the day. People’s specific dietary needs were known about and catered for.

Staff were now careful to make sure they recorded the food and fluids people had, where this was required, to ensure people maintained their health.

A comprehensive range of quality auditing processes were in place to check the safety and quality of the service provided. Action was taken where improvements were needed. The provider now held a governance meeting once a month to ensure their clear oversight of the service they provided.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe and reporting any suspicions of abuse. Staff knew what the reporting procedures were and were confident their concerns would be listened to by the registered manager.

Individual risks were identified and steps were taken to reduce and control risk. Staff had the guidance they needed to support people to maintain and improve their independence while at the same time preventing harm. Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded by staff; action was taken and followed up by the registered manager.

The procedures for the administration of people’s prescribed medicines were managed and recorded appropriately so people received their medicines in a safe way. Regular audits of medicines were undertaken to ensure safe procedures continued to be followed and action was taken when errors were made.

The registered manager and deputy manager carried out a comprehensive initial assessment with people before they moved in to the service. People were fully involved in the assessment, together with their relatives where appropriate. Care plans were developed and regularly updated and reviewed to consider people’s changing needs. People’s specific needs were taken account of and addressed in care planning to ensure equality of access to services.

People had access to a range of activities to choose from. Some people preferred their own company and wished to spend time in their room reading or watching TV and this was respected by staff. People were asked their views

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The service was safe.

Staff knew how to protect people from abuse.

Risks were assessed, and steps taken to mitigate against them.

Medicines were being managed safely.

There were enough staff to meet people�s needs.

People were protected from the spread of infection by prevention and control processes.

Accidents and incidents were reported by staff in line with the provider�s policy.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The service was effective.

People�s nutrition and hydration needs were being met.

People�s needs were assessed in line with current legislation.

Staff had received the training and had the skills to meet people�s needs. They were supported in their role through a supervision process.

Staff worked across organisations to help deliver effective care, support and treatment.

People�s needs were met by the design and adaptation of the premises.

Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and respect.

People were supported to express their views and told us they were involved in making decisions about their care.

People�s privacy, dignity and independence were promoted and respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People�s care was provided in a personalised way.

A range of activities were planned for people to take part in if they wished.

People were encouraged to maintain relationships with those who mattered to them.

People told us they were confident to raise complaints about the care and support they received.

People were supported to voice their wishes to plan for the end of their life.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 August 2018

The service was well led.

Quality assurance systems were effective in ensuring shortfalls in service delivery were identified and rectified.

People, their families and staff were encouraged to be engaged and involved with the service.

The registered manager had notified CQC of all significant events.

There were close links with the local community.