You are here

Archived: Leybourne House

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 April 2012
Date of Publication: 4 May 2012
Inspection Report published 4 May 2012 PDF | 62.57 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 11 April 2012

During a routine inspection

At the time of our inspection of Leybourne House on Wednesday 11 April 2012 there were 37 people accommodated at the home.

All but one person were too frail physically or mentally to talk to us about their experiences of living at the home. We therefore used a formal way of observing people to help us understand how their needs were met and what it was like for them living at Leybourne House. This involved us observing small groups of people for a period of time and recording their experiences at regular intervals. Our observations included their state of well-being, how they interacted with staff, other people and the environment.

We observed two groups. One group comprised four and the other three people. They were in two different lounge dining areas in the home. Both groups were observed for a period of fifty minutes.

We saw some people positively engaging with each other and also with staff. Some people in one group became involved in a flower arranging activity organised by staff. We saw that care workers were attentive and provided support sensitively when people required help. We noted that staff understood people’s needs and were able to anticipate those of individuals’ who were unable to communicate verbally.

One person living at Leybourne House who was able to talk with us told us that that living there was “marvellous”. They told us that the staff were “very good” and helped people who needed assistance. The person said that relationships with staff were “easy going” and that there were “lots of things going” on such as trips out. They also told us that clergy visited the home and that until recently another person had gone out by taxi to a local church every Sunday. They said staff were polite and they were impressed by the home’s manager who they described as a “smart operator”. They told us they thought she was “on the ball” and “had made a difference”.

We spoke with three visiting relatives all of whom called at the home very regularly. They all expressed positive views about the home and the care their relatives received. They all told us that they were involved in and consulted about the care their relatives received. One visitor told us that their relative had lived at the home for several years and said, “They know if my wife wants something or is unwell from her demeanour. They are very caring, if someone needs help they get on with it, they don’t have to be told”.

Another visitor whose relative had also lived at the home for some years told us that they thought the reason their relative had “done so well” was because of the “quality of care” the staff provided.

We also spoke with ten members of the home’s staff team in order to hear how they worked. They included the registered manager, a dining room assistant, an activities co-coordinator and care assistants. They told us that they received regular training appropriate for their respective work roles.