Archived: OSJCT Stratford Court

This inspection took place on 10 February 2016 and was unannounced.

OSJCT Stratford Court is due to close in April 2016 and CQC have received an application to cancel their registration. People who use the service and the majority of the staff team are moving to a new, purpose built service, being opened by the provider. This was a focused inspection and was carried out in response to a number of concerns we had received from members of the public and relatives of people who use the service. We were not planning to complete a full inspection of the service before it closed. However, in response to the concerns we received, we completed this focused inspection, to assess the areas of concern that had been raised.

There was a registered manager at the service, although they were not in day to day charge and CQC had received an application to cancel their registration. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. A new manager had been appointed to the home and was available on the day of the inspection.

The home was not cleaned effectively. We saw some areas where further cleaning was needed to ensure people were cared for in a clean and pleasant environment. Examples included one person’s walking frame which had dried food stains on the legs, arm chairs with dried food debris on the arms and seat, lap tables with dried food debris on the side and underneath and hand rails that were sticky to touch.

Medicines held by the home were securely stored and people were supported to take the medicines they had been prescribed. However, more information about support for people to take 'as required' medicines was needed. This would help to manage the risks of people receiving too much or too little of their ‘as required’ medicines and give staff clear information about the support people needed.

Staffing levels in the home had not been sufficient. Most people who use the service told us there had been problems with the number of staff available. Comments included, “It (staffing) is a big problem. They’re very busy, we need more staff. It takes a long time for staff to come when we need help” and “Staffing is a problem”. One person was more positive about staff availability, telling us, “Staff come quickly when I call them and they are always walking past my room”. However, the provider had taken action to address the concerns and recruit more staff.

Risks people faced were assessed and action taken to manage the risks. Details of the support people needed in relation to managing risks were set out in their care plans. The risk assessments contained detailed information about people’s needs and support to manage identified risks.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

People commented favourably on the meals. One person told us 'the food's excellent. I'd stay here for the food alone.' We saw all people, including those who chose to remain in their rooms, were offered a choice of meals. The chef showed a detailed knowledge of people's preferences and dietary needs.

The home was clean, smelt fresh and was regularly maintained. One person described the home as 'lovely and clean.' Regular checks on the cleanliness and maintenance of the home took place. Staff had been trained in infection control.

People said there were enough staff on duty. One person told us: 'yes there are enough staff.' A member of staff described the 'good levels of staff', including in the evenings. The home was employing agency staff. These staff worked there regularly and knew the people living in the home and the provider's systems.

We observed staff supported people who had dementia in the ways they needed. This included responding to people when they were showing signs of aggression. Frail people were appropriately supported so they were not placed at additional risk, for example of developing pressure ulcers or dehydration

There were safe systems for administration of medicines, including detailed records and safe storage systems. People were given the support they needed to take their medication.

People told us they felt able to raise issues with staff. One person told us 'I tell them like it is, they take it very well'. The new manager had reviewed all areas of service provision and was taking action to make improvements. This included ensuring all staff were undertaking training and supervised in their roles and putting systems in place to reduce risk of accidents to people.