You are here

Archived: Murreyfield House Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 6 June 2017

During a routine inspection

Murreyfield House is a care home that is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to 23 older people, including those with dementia related conditions. The property consists of two large houses that have been converted into a care home and adapted to meet the needs of older people. The home is situated on one of the main roads into the city centre so it is close to transport links and other local amenities.

At the last inspection in January 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People who lived at the home told us they were content and felt with the staff who looked after them. We observed staff providing support for people throughout our inspection visit. We found they were kind and patient and this was confirmed by people we spoke with.

We found by looking at appropriate documentation and talking with staff they had been recruited safely, received ongoing training relevant to their role and supported by the registered manager. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people in their care. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet the needs of people who lived at the home.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Care records showed they were reviewed and any changes were recorded.

We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required

Medicines had been checked on receipt into the home, given as prescribed and stored and disposed of correctly. We looked at medication administration records of people who lived at Murreyfield House and found them to be correct and up to date.

People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People told us they had choices of meals and there were always alternatives if they didn’t want what was on offer. We confirmed this by our observations at lunchtime. Care records we looked at described people’s food preferences and any allergies. Comments were positive about the quality of food and included, “We get plenty and fortunately we have good cooks.”

People who lived at the home told us staff and the registered manager had a caring and supportive manner. Comments from people who lived at the home included, “The staff make me feel I'm at home here. They are very friendly and we like to have a laugh together.”

The registered manager had a complaints procedure which was made available to people on their admission to the home and their relatives. No complaints had been received. People who lived at the home told us they were aware of the who to talk with if they had any concerns.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits, staff and ‘resident’ meetings to seek their views about the service provided.

Inspection carried out on 9 and 10 January 2015

During a routine inspection

We undertook this unannounced inspection on the 9 and 10 January 2015. The last inspection took place on 30 August 2013 and the service was compliant in all the regulations we assessed.

Murreyfield House is a care home that is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to 23 people including people who are living with dementia and people with mental health related conditions. The property consists of two large houses that have been converted into a care home and adapted to meet the needs of the people who use the service. The home is situated on one of the main roads into the city centre so it is close to transport links and other local amenities.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People were treated with dignity and respect throughout our inspection. Staff spoke to people in a considerate way and included people in decisions about their daily lives. It was evident staff were aware of people’s wishes for how care, treatment and support was to be delivered.

People who used the service had their assessed needs met by appropriate numbers of suitably trained staff. Records showed staff had been recruited safely and relevant checks had been completed before staff commenced working within the service.

Staff told us they had undertaken training in relation to safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse and they felt confident the management would respond to and investigate any concerns they raised. Records we looked at confirmed safeguarding training had been completed.

Medicines were managed safely. Policies were in place that provided guidance on the safe ordering, storage, administration and destruction of medication.

People were supported to maintain a healthy and balanced diet. Choices were offered for each meal and a self-service kitchen was available to help people maintain their independence. Dieticians and speech and language therapists had been contacted and provided guidance when people required a high calorie diet or other assistance.

People were involved in the planning of their care and records showed that reviews took place periodically. We saw that when possible people had signed to show their agreement with the contents of their care plans.

The service sent questionnaires to people who used the service, their families and relevant professionals. We saw that when feedback was received it was acted upon and used as a way to improve the service.

A range of audits were completed to highlight any shortfalls within the service. Records confirmed the fire alarm and emergency lighting systems were checked regularly.

Inspection carried out on 7 February 2014

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

The provider gave their assurances that training on the organisation policies and procedures had taken place and all senior staff had signed to say that they understand the procedures. We were provided with documentation that confirmed this.

Staff we spoke with confirmed training had taken place in December 2013 and were also able to explain the procedures for recording and notifying the management of incidents. Senior care staff we spoke with told us, “Carers also have a duty to report incidents and they are aware that if an incident occurs, they notify a senior or the manager immediately.”

Inspection carried out on 5 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We looked at three support plans of people who used the service and found that they included a signature from either the person who received care or a nominated representative. This ensured that people were engaged with their care and support and these arrangements were understood by them.

We looked at cleaning schedules which were completed daily and a ‘monthly turn out’ which ensured a deeper clean of people's rooms, facilities and other areas. We found that cleaning equipment in the domestic's room such as mops were stored correctly.

We saw there were two main lounges on the first floor which were quiet, warm and comfortable. We saw that rooms were personalised with pictures, ornaments or furniture owned by the people that used the service. This showed the service promoted people's independence and supported their daily living activities.

We looked at records provided by the manager that confirmed all essential training was either up to date or being currently planned. The manager told us, "Each staff members' training record is now identified in a matrix and that quickly identifies when training is due for review."

The manager told us that a complaint had not been made since 2011 and we saw records that confirmed this. A visiting relative we spoke with told us, “I have never needed to complain about anything” and "The manager listens to us and they do the best that they can.”

Inspection carried out on 29 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with four people who lived at the home and three visitors.

People told us that they were looked after very well and that staff were very nice. They said they had activities to do if they wanted but could sit quietly and not get involved as well. One person who was having respite care in the home wanted to move in permanently because she thought it was so nice and that the staff were very good.

People said that they felt safe in the home. Some comments were, "They look after you here",and "They are a nice lot, a lovely lot" and another said "I think it’s lovely, you get better looked after here."

Inspection carried out on 6 October 2011

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who lived at the home. They told us that staff were kind and made sure that their needs were met. They said that staff spoke to them in a nice manner. One person told us about their trips out of the home with family members and to a local club.

People told us that meals at the home were good and that there was always a choice of meal provided.

People told us that they felt safe living at the home.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)