Archived: Dorothy Terry House

At the time of our inspection there were eight people who were using the service. Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with three people who used the service, three staff who were supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service caring?

The people we spoke with were positive about the way they were cared for and supported. A person told us: "Staff definitely provide my care”. People were cared for by kind and attentive staff. We observed people asking staff to do things for them. Staff responded to the requests promptly and efficiently. The home was supported by a team of health and social care professionals who worked closely with staff in providing people's care needs.

Is the service responsive?

When people who lived in the home made suggestions for changes these were actioned as far as practically possible. The service worked well with external healthcare professionals to make sure people received good standards of care. Records confirmed people’s preferences and interests had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s wishes. People had been supported to maintain relationships with their relatives and friends.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. People told us they felt safe and we observed a relaxed atmosphere. CQC monitors the operation of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff have been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one. There were risk management plans in place for people and health and safety. We noted there were enough staff allocated to care for people and ensure their safety. We found that people did not always receive their medicines as prescribed by the doctor.

We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements in relation to safe management of medicines.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs had been assessed and care plans were in place. There was evidence of people and or their relatives being involved with the development and regular reviews of care plans. Staff encouraged and supported people in leading interesting and enriched lifestyles. The people we spoke with all said they received the standard of care that matched their needs. Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people living in the home.

Is the service well led?

The service had a quality assurance system in place. Records showed us that improvements had been made when they were identified through monitoring processes. Regular audits had been carried out that enabled staff to make changes that could be of benefit for the people who used the service. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and the ethos of the service.

We observed lunch being served to people who lived at the home during our inspection. People we spoke with told us that staff treated them with respect and helped them when required to meet their daily needs. Staff were seen to offer people choices of where they would like to eat their meal and assistance was provided at people’s own pace. It was evident that staff had a good rapport with people and it became evident that staff knew people’s likes and dislikes.

Three people who lived at the home told us that they were happy with the meals provided at Dorothy Terry House. They said: “Meals are really good” and: “I enjoy all the meals”.

Staff had been recruited in an appropriate way and checks had been undertaken to ensure that they were suitable to care for vulnerable people.

The manager had systems in place to gain the views and experiences of the people who used the service and had acted upon any suggestions that had been made.

At this inspection improvements had been made to people's care records following our inspection on 22 November 2012. We found that clear standards for recording had been set and were being followed by staff. This ensured that records were fully completed and provided a detailed overview of a person’s day and any changes in their care and support needs.

We saw that staff treated people with respect and dignity. Staff interacted positively with people. This ensured people’s choices in their everyday lives were promoted, namely through their care delivery, meals and activities offered.

People's needs had been assessed by a range of health and social care professionals which meant their health care needs had been monitored and met.

Staff knew how to safeguard people from harm and felt confident that if they had to report any abuse, action would be taken to protect people.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff knew how to meet people’s needs, and understood the needs of people living with dementia.

People’s complaints were listened to and resolved to their satisfaction.

We observed good staff practices to meet people’s needs but these were not always reflected in the information we saw in care plans. We found that significant changes in people’s needs were not being documented in care plans. This meant people were potentially at risk of receiving inconsistent care to meet their needs.