We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Sloane Nursing Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The Sloane Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People spoke positively about the service and said staff were caring and supportive. Throughout our inspection we observed staff interacted with people, had good relationships with individuals and staff were kind and empathetic in their approach.
The service had safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures and how to keep people safe. People's needs, and preferences were assessed and where risks were identified, plans were in place to manage risks safely.
There were safe arrangements in place to manage medicines and staff followed appropriate infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections.
Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs promptly. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people appropriately. Staff were appropriately supported through induction, training and regular supervision.
People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet that met their expressed cultural and dietary requirements. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People told us staff treated them in a kind, caring and respectful manner. People were involved in and consulted about their care and support needs. People had access to health and social care professionals as required. People were supported to participate in activities of their choosing, that met their needs and interests.
Staff worked with people to promote their rights and understood the Equality Act 2010, supporting people appropriately addressing any protected characteristics.
There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals and other organisations to plan and deliver an effective service. The service took people and staff’s views into account through surveys and informal feedback to help drive service improvements.
Rating at last inspection and update: The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 1 June 2018) and there was a breach of Regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. We found the service had improved and now met the characteristics of Good in all areas.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit in line with our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect the service sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the website at www.cqc.org.uk
At the time of our inspection there were 32 people using the service. The home had a manager in post who at the time of our inspection was in the process of registering with the CQC to become the registered manager for the service. 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.
At this inspection we found a breach of regulations because systems in place to monitor the safety of the premises and equipment were not effective or well-led. We have also made a recommendation to the provider in relation to the safe management and administration of medicines. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary needs and appropriate risks assessments were in place; however some improvement was required to enhance people’s meal time experience.
Staffing level ratios corresponded with staff that were on duty and call bell records showed staff responded promptly when required. There were arrangements in place to manage emergencies and staff were knowledgeable about what to do in the event of an emergency. There were systems and policies and procedures in place to protect people from the risk of infections. There were systems in place to ensure risks to people’s health and well-being were identified, assessed and managed appropriately. Accidents and incidents were recorded, managed and monitored to assist in reducing the risk of reoccurrence. There were systems in place to protect people from possible abuse and harm and staff were aware of their responsibilities to ensure people were kept safe. There were safe recruitment practices in place and appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff started work to ensure they were suitable to be employed in a health and social care environment. We observed there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to support people appropriately.
The manager and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and acted according to this legislation. People and their relatives where appropriate were involved in planning for and reviewing their care and had access to health and social care professionals when required. Staff received support, supervision and appraisals when required and had access to appropriate regular training. People told us they were happy with the care they received and staff were kind, supportive and attentive. People said that staff promoted their dignity and respected their privacy and independence. People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and their communication needs were met.
People’s physical and mental health needs and risks were assessed and care plans were implemented from assessments undertaken with participation from individuals and their relatives where appropriate. People’s end of life care needs and wishes were documented and respected. People's diverse needs and independence was promoted and respected and activities were provided to meet people’s need for stimulation. People told us they were aware of how to raise a concern and make a complaint if needed.
People and their relatives were complimentary about the management and staff at the home. Staff spoke positively about the management and culture of the home and told us they felt supported. There were systems in place to ensure the provider sought the views of people using the service and their relatives through regular residents and relatives meetings, annual surveys and by inviting people to submit feedback to help drive improvements.
The Sloane Nursing Home provides accommodation with nursing care for up to 33 people living with dementia, diabetes and stroke. The home also provides respite services and end of life care. At the time of our inspection there were 19 people using the service. The home 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.
There were systems and procedures in place to evaluate and monitor the quality of the service provided, however, these required improvement.
People were protected from the risk of abuse and there were policies and procedure in place which enabled staff to identify abuse and take appropriate action. Risks related to the health and safety of people using the service were identified, assessed and reviewed. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and environmental and maintenance checks were conducted on a regular basis. Accidents and incidents involving the safety of people using the service were recorded, managed and acted on appropriately. There were safe staff recruitment practices in place and appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff began working at the home. Medicines were managed, stored and administered safely.
Premises were adequately maintained and a refurbishment and development project on the building was near completion. There were adequate numbers of suitably qualified, experienced and appropriately trained staff to meet people’s needs. There were processes in place to ensure staff new to the home had appropriate skills and knowledge to deliver effective care. Staff were appropriately supported through regular supervision and were annually appraised of their performance. There were systems in place which ensured the service complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This provides protection for people who do not have capacity to make decisions for themselves. People were supported to eat and drink suitable healthy foods and sufficient amounts to meet their needs.
People told us staff were kind and caring. Staff showed good knowledge of people’s personalities and behaviour and were able to communicate effectively with them. Staff took time to build relationships with people and there was a keyworker system in place to allow this. Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy and treated people with respect. Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs with regards to their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and gender and supported people appropriately to meet their identified needs.
People received care and support that was responsive to their needs and respected their wishes. Health and social care professional’s advice was sought when required and recorded in people’s care plans to ensure that people’s needs were met. People were supported to engage in a range of activities that reduced the risk of isolation and that met their needs and reflected their interests. There was a complaints policy and procedure in place and information on how to make a compliant was on display at the home.
People and their relatives told us the home was welcoming and the registered manager and staff were supportive and approachable. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and the support they received to enable them to do their jobs well. People, their relatives and staff were provided with opportunities to provide feedback about the service.
We found that each person who used the service had a care plan in place with relevant risk assessments which were regularly updated to meet people's changing needs. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink. We found that the provider had policies and procedures in place to ensure that vulnerable adults were protected from abuse and staff had appropriate access to these policies. Support was in place to ensure that staff received adequate induction, training, supervision and appraisals. We found that people's care and support plans, staff records and other records relevant to the management of the services were accurate and fit for purpose.
We found that people were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and support needs. We also found that the provider had policies and procedures in place to ensure vulnerable adults were protected from abuse.
We found that staff had regular team meetings however staff training was not up-to-date and staff supervisions were not being carried out in line with the provider's timescale to support staff in performing their roles effectively. The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service people received.