You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 9 June 2014
Date of Publication: 5 July 2014
Inspection Report published 05 July 2014 PDF | 81.32 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 9 June 2014

During a routine inspection

We visited this service and talked with people to gain a balanced overview of what people experienced, what they thought and how they were cared for and supported. There were eighteen people living in the home at the time of our visit.

We spoke with three members of staff, the manager and administrator, five of the people who lived in the home, one visitor to the home, and five relatives. We observed how people were cared for and how staff interacted with them to get a view of the care they experienced.

We considered all of the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes that we inspected. We used that information to answer five key questions. Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We observed the interactions between the people who lived in the home and staff. People looked at ease in their surroundings. Staff spoke with them in a calm and friendly manner. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people who lived at the home.

We saw there were systems in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

Recruitment practice was safe and thorough. Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people were protected.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) which applies to care homes and hospitals. No applications had been made. The manager understood how this legislation applied to people and protected their rights.

We found that equipment was serviced at regular intervals to ensure it was safe to use.

Is the service effective?

People’s health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their care plans. Specialist pressure relieving, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required.

It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and knew them well. We saw people's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure their changing needs were planned for.

Visitors and the relatives of people living in the home confirmed that they were able to see people in private and that visiting times were flexible.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers were available at all times, showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. One person told us, “I’m very satisfied, when I ring the buzzer staff come to help.” A relative told us, “It’s a good place to be looked after, staff are very courteous and caring.” Another relative said, “It’s an excellent home, the staff are brilliant.”

People using the service, their relatives, friends and other people involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. The suggestions and ideas voiced by people were followed up.

People’s preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People’s needs had been assessed before they moved into the home and care plans reflected people’s assessed needs. We saw people's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure their changing needs were planned for.

Records confirmed people’s preferences, interests, and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s wishes. People had access to some activities and were able to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.

Records showed that staff responded quickly to changes in people's health. We saw people had access to a variety of health care providers to ensure their needs could be met.

Is the service well led?

The registered manager had been in post since the home had opened. The manager was experienced and caring and provided good leadership based on how best to meet the needs of people in an individualised way.

There were systems in place so people who lived in the home could share their views about how the home was run. The manager was able to give us examples of actions taken and changes that had been made as a result of listening to the people living in the home.

There were systems in place to ensure the quality of the service was regularly assessed and monitored.