We carried out a review of the data available to us about Village Green Care 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 Village Green Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Village Green Care Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 41 people. The service provides support to older and younger adults who may be living with dementia, a physical disability or need support with their mental health. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people using the service. The service is set up over two floors, one of which is set up to support people living with dementia. People have their own bedrooms with access to en-suite toilets and share communal areas such as lounges, dining rooms and a large garden.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The manager and provider had made positive changes at the service leading to an improved service for people. They acknowledged more work was needed in some areas to help keep making and sustaining these improvements. There was a positive culture at the service and staff clearly enjoyed their job roles. People and their relatives were happy with the support from the management and staff team. One person said, ‘‘There has been a lot of changes to the staff team and things keep getting better. I am very happy and am in a good place here.’’
People felt safe living at the service. Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew how to report concerns if they thought people may be at risk. The management team assessed risk to people and put plans in place to mitigate these as far as possible. There were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported safely with their medicines. Staff followed good infection control procedures and the service was clean.
People’s needs were assessed when they started using the service and reassessed when needed. Staff had the training, supervision, and competency to perform their job roles effectively. People were supported to eat and drink if this was necessary, and food looked and smelled appetising. Health professionals were consulted and involved in people’s support of this was necessary. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff were kind and caring and people were very positive about the support they received. People were able to make day to day choices about their support and were involved in discussions about their care. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and promoted their independence where possible. People received individualised person-centred care, though the management team acknowledged this was not always reflected fully in people’s support and care plans. Staff supported people to follow their interests and be a part of their community if this was people’s choice. If people had concerns, these were listened to and responded to in a timely manner. People received dignified care at the end of their lives.
People were happy and relaxed being supported by staff. The manager completed audits and surveys to monitor the quality of the service. People, relatives, and the staff team were able to feedback about the service and this was used to drive improvements. The staff team linked and worked with other organisations and health professionals to promote good outcomes for people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (report published 05 July 2022) and there were breaches 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 inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Village Green Care Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 41 people. The service provides support to older people who may be living with dementia or a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 28 people using the service.
Village Green Care Home is a two storey building. The ground floor is used to support people who require nursing care and the first floor has been adapted to support people living with dementia. People share communal areas such as lounges, bathrooms and a garden and have their own bedrooms.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were not always supported by the appropriate number of staff. Staff supported people with essential care needs but did not have time to spend chatting with them or supporting them with social interests. Not all staff had completed the training deemed as necessary in their job roles and systems were not fully in place to check staff competencies. Records were unclear as to whether people were always supported in line with their assessed needs.
People were not always supported safely with their medicines. Risks to people had been assessed, however assessments were not always sufficiently detailed to guide staff how to support people safely. Records were unclear as to whether people were always supported in line with their assessed needs. People were not always supported with a positive mealtime experience.
People were not supported to engage in social interests or leave the service to be a part of the community. Staff did not always support people according to their personal preferences. People were not always supported with kindness and compassion and their privacy and dignity was not always respected.
People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not always support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice.
Audits completed by the manager and provider were not effective in identifying where improvements could be made. Actions were not always taken to drive improvements and some aspects of quality monitoring had not been fully imbedded at the service.
People and relatives were happy with their or their family members care and support. One person told us, ‘‘Overall I am very happy here. Staff treat me kindly and with respect which is all I can ask for.’’
Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew who to report any concerns to. Systems were in place to learn lessons when things went wrong. Staff kept the service clean and followed good IPC practices. Staff felt well supported and could ask the manager for any help they needed. People were supported to see health professionals if this support was needed. People were asked for consent and staff respected their choices.
People were supported in a kind and caring way for the most part. Staff had made efforts to get to know people well as individuals. Plans were in place to support people with dignity and respect at the end of their lives. The manager had a complaints policy in place and complaints were responded to in a timely manner.
The manger and provider were keen to improve the experience of people living at the service. They took immediate action to address our concerns and had plans in place to continue making and sustaining improvements. We were assured this would address the issues we found during this inspection. People and staff were given opportunities to feedback about the service. Staff worked well with health professionals to help achieve good outcomes for people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for the service under the previous provider was good (report published 18 November 2017).
We also visited this service to look at infection prevention control (IPC) practices (report published 11 February 2022) and found no concerns.
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the all sections of this full report. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
Enforcement
We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to monitor the service and will take further action if needed.
We have identified breaches in relation to staffing levels, person centred care and good governance at this inspection. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had measures in place for visitors to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. This included showing proof of vaccination against COVID-19 and a negative lateral flow test before entering the building. Staff were trained how to use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) appropriately.
Staff made changes to the environment such as moving furniture around to help promote social distancing. Staff also spoke with people and supported them to understand the reasons why social distance had to be maintained.
The service looked clean and smelled fresh. There were plenty of 'domestic' staff whose role was to focus on keeping the service clean and free from infection. Domestic staff had a good understanding of their role and felt well supported by the provider.
Staff were dedicated and caring. They promoted people's wellbeing whilst the service was in 'lockdown'. Staff made sure they spent time with people who were isolating and supported people to stay in contact with friends and family using methods such as video calls.
Family and friends were supported to visit their loved ones in line with government guidance. One relative told us about the positive impact this had on their family member. The relative also confirmed that infection control processes in place at the service made them feel very safe.