You are here

Archived: Greathouse - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 March 2017

Greathouse Care home provides accommodation which includes nursing and personal care for up to 25 adults. They are a part of Leonard Cheshire Disability who are a charitable organisation providing care and support to people living with disabilities. At the time of our visit 22 people were living at the home.

This inspection took place on 25 and 26 January 2017. The first day of the inspection was unannounced. At a previous inspection which took place in November 2014 the provider required improvement in Safe, although this was not a breach of regulation. This related to the interactions of one person living at the home. We found on this inspection the provider had taken all the steps to make the necessary improvements needed to resolve the situation.

A registered manager was employed by the service and was present throughout our inspection. 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.

We saw some areas of the home were damaged. For example, skirting boards were chipped and worn, paint was peeling off the walls and door frames were damaged. This meant the cleaning of these areas was difficult. This had been identified by the registered manager who developed an action plan of repairs. As the home is a listed building the registered manager was currently in the process of obtaining the necessary permission to undertake these repairs.

People spoke positively about the care and support they received. They described staff as kind, caring and friendly. People told us they felt safe living at Greathouse. Staff had taken the time to understand people’s care and support needs. Staff understood people’s communication needs and used non-verbal communication where required to interact with people.

People received care and support from staff who followed the guidance provided in their individualised care and support plans. These contained detailed information to assist staff on providing care and support in a manner which respected the person’s preferred individual requirements. People were supported and encouraged by staff to make choices about their daily living including how they wished to spend their day.

People were supported to participate in a variety of meaningful activities to prevent them from experiencing social isolation. A range of activities were available to people which included external day trips to places of interest to people.

People’s safety was assessed and risks that may cause harm had been identified and guidance put in place to support people to manage these appropriately. People were supported by staff who encouraged them to remain independent. Appropriate risk assessments were in place to keep people safe from potential harm or abuse.

The provider ensured people were kept safe by ensuring sufficient staff were deployed to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff received safeguarding vulnerable adults training and were aware of their responsibility to report any concerns. Policies and procedures were in place to advise staff on what they should do if they had concerns.

People’s health needs were met. Staff engaged with healthcare professionals when required to ensure people’s identified health care needs were met. People were protected from the unsafe administration of medicines. Nurses and senior staff were responsible for the administering of people’s medicines and had received training to ensure people’s medicines were administered, stored and disposed of correctly.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their nutrional and hydration needs. People spoke positively about the food provided. They confirmed that snacks and drinks wer

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 3 March 2017

The service was not always safe.

Some areas of the home were damaged. For example skirting boards were chipped and worn, paint was peeling off the walls and door frames were damaged. A plan of repairs was in place and permission was sought to implement the repairs. This meant the cleaning of these areas was difficult.

People were supported by staff who had received training in safeguarding people and who knew what actions to take should they suspect people were at risk of harm or abuse. Staff had access to relevant guidance on keeping people safe.

The provider had robust recruitment processes in place to ensure people were protected from the employment of unsuitable staff.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 March 2017

The service was effective.

People’s needs were met by staff who were able to access the training needed to meet people’s needs. Training records we viewed confirmed staff received training on a range of subjects.

People told us they liked the food and were able to make choices about what they had to eat.

Records showed relevant health and social care professionals were involved with people’s care.

The staff acted in line with current legislation and guidance where people lacked the mental capacity to make certain decisions about their support needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 3 March 2017

The service was caring.

People’s care and support took into account their individual preferences for how they wished to receive care and their diverse needs.

People’s dignity, privacy and independence were promoted and people were treated with respect.

Staff knew people well. People told us staff were kind, caring and friendly.

People’s independence was promoted and they were involved in decisions relating to their daily living.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 March 2017

The service was responsive.

Care records showed how people wished to receive their care and support. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care needs.

People were supported to take part in activities and to maintain contact with family and friends.

Procedures were in place for the registered manager to monitor, investigate and respond to complaints in an effective way. Regular meetings took place where people using the service could provide feedback and make suggestions about the service they received.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 March 2017

The service was well-led.

There was a registered manager in post. Staff said they felt supported by the registered manager and could raise any concerns and appropriate action would be taken.

There were processes in place to monitor the quality of the service. These checks were used to identify any improvements and ensure action was taken as required.

Appropriate action was taken in response to accidents and incidents and to reduce the risk of them recurring.