You are here

Newnton House Residential Care Home Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 23 April 2014
Date of Publication: 23 May 2014
Inspection Report published 23 May 2014 PDF | 75.97 KB


Inspection carried out on 23 April 2014

During a routine inspection

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records. We looked at out five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People who used the service were treated with dignity and respect. Peole's views and the views of their family and representatives were included as part of their care planning.

Staff took into account risks to individuals to ensure the safety and welfare of people. However care plans and risk assessments needed further development to ensure people’s needs and how to meet them were clearly identified. Medicines were kept safely and handled appropriately.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. We found that the service was compliant in seeking consent from people who used the service.

Is the service effective?

Care workers were knowledgeable about how to meet people’s needs when caring for particular individuals. People were overall stable in their placement and progressing well with their individual plans and goals. People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans.

People’s mental and physical healthcare needs were monitored and met by health and social care professionals.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service were supported by kind and attentive staff. People were overall positive about staff. They said staff were caring, helpful and encouraged them to ensure they remained independent.

People’s diversity, values and human rights were respected. The provider consulted people and their representatives about individual needs and wishes, including their cultural and religious needs. Individual preferences were taken into account as part of their care.

Is the service responsive?

Individual care needs were reviewed and their plans updated to ensure people received a service that met their current needs.

Staff acted appropriately in response to people’s emotional and behavioural needs. Staff used assessment tools to monitor the health and wellbeing of people, consulting other professionals for advice and input where needed. There were no complaints about the service, however people said staff listened and were responsive to dealing with any issues they raised.

Is the service well led?

The provider undertook regular audits to check the quality of service. However there was no system in place to analyse and report on the views of people who used the service, their relatives or people involved in their care.

Staff received training and supervision with their manager and said they were well supported and received appropriate professional development. This meant they were familiar with their roles and responsibilities to carry them out more effectively.