Archived: Southlands Care Home

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask. This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People told us that they felt safe living at Southlands and that they were treated well. One person explained: 'I feel very safe here; the last thing I would feel here is unsafe.' Another person told us: 'Yes I feel safe, I would rather be here than at home.'

Risk assessments were in place. Those checked on the day of our visit showed us that the risks associated with people's care had been assessed, and measures had been put into place to reduce that risk. This showed us that people's health and welfare was, wherever possible, protected.

Staff spoken with knew what to do if they suspected that someone was being abused. One staff member explained: 'I would report it straight the way and they [the management team] would deal with it, you can't fault the care.'

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. Relevant policies and procedures were in place and the registered manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one. The majority of staff spoken with also understood what it meant to deprive someone of their liberty and why this might happen.

People using the service told us that sometimes there were not enough staff on duty to meet their needs. One person told us: 'We have to wait for everything here.' Another person explained: 'We sit and watch the television and don't see any staff all afternoon. On the afternoon of our visit, there were two care workers on duty. We were told that there were two people who needed the assistance of two care workers for their support. This meant that during these times the remaining people who used the service were potentially at risk of not getting the care and support they needed.

Is the service effective?

We spoke with people who used the service and they told us that overall, they were satisfied with the care and support they received. However, they told us that they would receive a better service if there were more staff around to help them. One person told us: 'The staff are brilliant, they are really good and they listen.' Another told us: 'When you ring your bell, they come and tell you they won't be a minute and go away, but they are always much more than a minute.'

Care plans on the whole, provided staff with information about people's care and support needs, though some were more comprehensive than others and not all had been fully completed. It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff, that although some care plans were basic in content, they understood the needs of the people they supported. One person told us: 'They know what help I need, they are all lovely.'

Is the service caring?

We observed staff going about their work. They treated the people they were supporting in a kind and respectful way and, although staff availability was at times limited, provided them with the time that they needed in order to carry out a task. This included assisting people with their meals and assisting them to use the bathroom.

Everyone spoken with, told us that the staff were caring and attentive. One person told us: 'The ones we've got, we are lucky to have them.' A visitor explained: 'I can't fault them for their care, any problems and they get the doctor and my relative always looks well cared for.'

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home and they had been involved in the care planning process. One visitor explained: 'They did an assessment to see what they [their relative] could and couldn't do.'

Relevant professionals had been involved in people's care and records showed that visits were arranged whenever someone needed to be seen. This included visits from their doctor and the local speech and language team. This ensured that the people who used the service received the care and treatment they required.

Is the service well-led?

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home. They felt supported by the management team and they explained that they were able to talk to them, if they had a concern of any kind. Staff supervisions and staff meetings were held. This enabled the staff to have a say on how the service was run.

A quality assurance system was in place. This enabled the registered manager to regularly assess the service to ensure that people received the care and support they needed in a safe and effective way.

A complaints process was in place and people who used the service knew who to talk to if they had a concern of any kind. One person told us: 'I would talk to one of the managers.' Complaints received had been appropriately investigated. This showed us that complaints were taken seriously and when necessary, relevant action taken.

Another person told us 'activities are provided staff will take you out. One person goes out to church. We have resident meetings, the hair dresser visits every Wednesday, and we are treated well by all staff'.

People using the service also told us they enjoyed their food and described the meals as good. They told us they were given their medicines when they needed them. We found the recording of medicines when out of stock was not always correctly used.

We found one person did not always have the supervision suggested for them in their care plan. This may suggest a lack of staff around when they needed them.

The registered manager was on temporary sick leave. During her absence there had been a reduced opportunity for people using the services and for staff to give feedback on how they were coping with the changes. We found the quality assurance systems in place we not being used effectively.