You are here

Southlands Retirement Apartments with Care and Support Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The inspection took place on 16 and 17 October 2017 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in April 2016 the service was rated ‘requires improvement’ because staff were not always given the necessary skills and training to care for people and there was a lack of activities for people to participate in. At this inspection the service made the required improvements.

Southlands Nursing Home is a care home for older people; and is registered to accommodate up to 36 people. The accommodation also includes self-contained apartments. It is located in a suburban area of Leeds within walking distance of Roundhay Park and with good transport links and local amenities nearby. There were 17 people living in the service at the time of the inspection.

At the time of the inspection, the service had a registered manager. 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 told us they felt safe living at the service and that there were enough staff to meet their needs. Staff were recruited safely, and staff knew how to protect people from abuse using the systems and processes provided by the service.

People were given their medicines safely, with accurate records made. Medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely.

Staff were given an induction that equipped them with the knowledge and skills to support people safely. Training needs were monitored by the registered manager and staff were supported with supervisions and appraisals to identify further training opportunities.

People were supported to access medical professionals where required. People were supported to maintain good health through a nutritionally balanced diet. Their weight and nutritional intake was monitored appropriately.

People told us they were cared for by kind and attentive staff, who gave due consideration to their privacy and dignity. People told us they were independent, and staff facilitated them to be as independent as they wanted.

There was a good range of internal and external activities for people living at the home. People told us they participated in interesting and varied activities, and that the activities coordinator, who had been employed since the last inspection, had made improvements to people’s social lives and wellbeing.

There was a robust complaints procedure at the home, and people told us they were confident they knew how to raise a complaint. Complaints we reviewed were given appropriate attention and acted upon by the registered manager.

There was a positive working culture, and staff told us they were confident in the leadership of the service. Staff told us they felt listened to by the registered manager and we saw regular staff meetings were held where staff participated openly.

There were appropriate mechanisms in place to monitor the quality of the service provided, and the registered manager was given good support by the provider.

The service proactively sought feedback from people living at the service through surveys, questionnaires and ‘relatives and residents’ meetings.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The service was safe.

There were enough staff to look after people living at the service. People told us they felt safe.

There were checks in place during staff recruitment to ensure staff were safe to care for vulnerable people.

Medicines were ordered, administered, recorded and disposed of appropriately.

Effective

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were given an effective induction and mandatory training programme which was monitored by the registered manager.

People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and were supported by staff who monitored their nutrition and weight where necessary.

People were supported to access healthcare professionals and referrals were made to health professionals on people�s behalf when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The service was caring.

People were cared for by kind and attentive staff who knew their preferences.

People�s privacy and dignity were respected at all times.

People were supported to live independently and given choices as to how they wanted to be cared for.

Responsive

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The service was responsive.

There was a varied programme of activities and people were supported to maintain links with those who were important to them.

People�s care plans were written in a person-centred way with clear guidelines for staff on how to care for people. Care plans were regularly reviewed.

There was a robust complaints process and people knew how to make a complaint.

Well-led

Good

Updated 28 November 2017

The service was well-led.

There were systems and processes in place to monitor the quality of the service.

Staff were confident in the leadership of the service and felt the registered manager was open and transparent.

The service gathered feedback from people, their relatives and staff on the quality of care through meetings, surveys and questionnaires.