You are here

Archived: St Martins Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

This inspection took place on 18 January 2017 and was unannounced. St Martins provides accommodation and personal care for up to 21 people with and without dementia. On the day of our inspection 16 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.

Staff understood their responsibility to protect people from the risk of abuse and appropriate action was taken in response to any incidents. Risks to people’s health and safety were regularly assessed and action taken to reduce the risks.

There were sufficient numbers of staff employed and people’s needs were met in a timely manner because staff were organised and well deployed. People received their medicines when they needed them and medicines were stored and recorded appropriately.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The DoLS is part of the MCA, which is in place to protect people who lack capacity to make certain decisions because of illness or disability. DoLS protects the rights of such people by ensuring that if there are restrictions on their freedom these are assessed by professionals who are trained to decide if the restriction is needed. There were systems in place to ensure people were not deprived of their liberty unlawfully. People were supported to provide consent for the care they received.

Staff were provided with relevant training, supervision and appraisal. There was a plan in place to ensure any gaps in training provision were rectified. People had access to sufficient quantities of food and drink and told us they enjoyed the food. People had access to a range of healthcare services and staff followed the guidance that was provided.

There were caring and friendly relationships between staff and the people living at St Martins. People were empowered to make day to day decisions about their care and staff respected the choices people made. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff and their right to privacy was upheld.

Staff were aware of people’s care needs and provided responsive care. However, people’s care plans did not always contain sufficient information about their current support needs. There was a limited range of activities provided which some people felt did not meet their social needs. People told us they would feel comfortable making a complaint to the registered manager.

There was an open and transparent culture at the home, people and staff felt comfortable speaking up if they wanted to. People and staff commented positively on the registered manager, who provided clear and positive leadership. People were able to provide their opinion on the quality of the service they received and their views were acted upon. The registered manager had implemented effective quality monitoring systems which identified areas for improvement and ensured action was taken.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risk of abuse and risks to their health and safety were well managed.

There were enough staff to meet people�s needs and safe recruitment procedures were followed.

People received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was effective.

People were cared for by staff who received appropriate training and supervision.

People were asked for their consent and staff acted in people�s best interests where they could not provide consent.

People had access to sufficient food and drink and had access to healthcare professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was caring.

Staff cared for people in a compassionate manner and there were positive relationships.

People and relatives were supported to be involved in making decisions about their care and people�s choices were respected.

People�s privacy and dignity was respected.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was not always responsive.

People felt well cared for and staff provided responsive care. However, people�s care plans did not always contain sufficient information to understand their support needs.

There was a limited range of activities provided which did not meet everybody�s social needs.

People felt able to complain and knew how to do so, although feedback had not always been provided about actions taken.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 February 2017

The service was well led.

There was an open and transparent culture in the home.

The registered manager provided clear leadership and was well thought of by people and staff.

People were offered different ways of providing their opinion about the quality of the service. Action was taken to bring about any improvements identified.