You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

We inspected the service on 25 March 2018. The inspection was unannounced. Betsy Clara is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Betsy Clara is registered to provide accommodation and nursing or personal care for a maximum of 48 people. The home specialises in providing care to older people, people who have disabilities and some people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 43 people living in the service. Betsy Clara is situated in Maidstone and is arranged over two floors.

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 were protected from abuse. Staff received regular safeguarding training, and were able to tell us about different types of abuse and what action they would take if they saw someone being abused. Risks to people had been identified and they had been involved in developing plans to minimise them. Positive risk taking was encouraged and guidance was provided to staff in order to help keep people safe. The provider had also ensured that the environment was safe for people. There were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. The manager used a dependency tool to calculate the numbers of staff needed based upon the needs of the people living there. Staff were recruited safely. People received their medicines safely. The service had a close relationship with the local GP, who visited on a weekly basis to review each person’s medicines. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Accidents and incidents were reported by staff in line with the provider’s policy, and the registered manager took steps to ensure that lessons were learned when things went wrong.

People’s needs were assessed and their care was delivered in line with current legislation. Staff had the training and skills they needed to meet people's needs. Newly recruited staff received a comprehensive induction before they started to support people and regular ongoing face to face training sessions. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. Staff referred to and followed guidance from health professionals such as dieticians and the local Speech and Language Therapy (SaLT) team. Suitable arrangements were in place to ensure that people received effective and coordinated care when they were referred to or moved between services, such as when they went to or returned from hospital. People’s needs were met by the adaptation, design and decoration of the service.

People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion. People had been supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care and treatment as far as possible. People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted. Staff were able to give examples of how they treated people with dignity when supporting them.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Each person and their relatives were involved in the development of a personalised care plan which took into account their wishes and preferences. People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities that were appropriate to them. The service employed a full-time activities coordinator who organised activities based on the interests of people. Complaints were listened and responded to. People told us they knew how to make a complaint and were confident to do so if they needed to. People were encouraged to mainta

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was Safe.

People were protected from abuse.

Risks to people and the environment were assessed and minimised.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe and meet their needs.

Staff were recruited safely.

People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and competency checked.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

Accidents and incidents were reported by staff in line with the provider’s policy.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was Effective.

People’s needs were assessed and their care was delivered in line with current legislation.

Staff received the training and had the skills they needed to meet people's needs.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People told us they enjoyed their meals.

Staff worked together across organisations to help deliver effective care, support and treatment.

Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act.

People’s needs were met by the adaptation, design and decoration of the service.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was Caring.

People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.

People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care and support.

People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was Responsive.

People's care was provided in a personalised way.

People were encouraged to maintain relationships with those who mattered to them.

People told us they were confident to raise complaints and concerns about the support they received.

People were supported to take part in activities that interested or were appropriate to them.

People were supported at the end of their life to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was Well-led.

The registered manager had an oversight of and reviewed the daily culture in the service, including the attitudes, values and behaviour of staff.

Management encouraged transparency and honesty within the service.

Governance systems were effective in ensuring that shortfalls in service delivery were identified and rectified.

People, their families and staff were encouraged to be engaged and involved with the service.

There were strong and growing links with the local community.