Field House

Updated 4 March 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

Service and service type

Field House Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

The first day of the inspection was unannounced. The second day was announced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with six people who used the service and one relative about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the provider, registered manager, assistant manager, senior care workers, care workers and the chef. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with one professional who regularly visit the service.

Updated 4 March 2020

About the service

Field House Care Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 34 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 39 people.

Field House Care Home is laid out over three floors and divided into areas: Orchard View and the Main House. Orchard view provides accommodation for people living with dementia and is laid out over one level. There are bedrooms, toilet and washing facilities, a kitchen and lounge-diner. The Main House offers accommodation across three floors, provides toilet and washing facilities, a hairdressing room, two lounges and dining area. There are additional ‘nooks’ or areas where people can sit throughout communal areas in the home. All floors can be accessed by a lift and there is access to other areas in the home via a stairlift. People have level access to large gardens. The registered manager’s office is adjacent to the main entrance.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they received support from staff who were kind. People’s equality characteristics were met by the provider. The provider supported people to express their views and be involved with decisions about their care. Staff spoke confidently about how they would support people in a dignified way.

Care plans we reviewed were person-centred and people were supported to access information that was important to them. The provider ensured people were able to maintain relationships and people were supported to access relevant activities. Complaints were reviewed and managed appropriately, the registered manager maintained a log of compliments. People were supported to create treatment escalation plans (TEPs) and the provider was working to develop end of life care plans.

People received care that was effective; people’s needs and choices were assessed and reflected in their care plans. Mobility assessments for people who used specialist equipment were not completed in line with published guidance. Also, they did not include all the information required by the provider’s template. Staff told us they were supported to carry out their roles through supervision and training. People were supported to eat and drink enough. People retained 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. People told us they were supported to access the healthcare they needed.

People told us they felt safe. People received safe care; risks were identified and assessed, guidance was available for staff about how they could lower potential risks to service users. Staff spoke confidently about how they would identify potential abuse and what they would do if abuse was suspected or witnessed. The provider used a staffing dependency tool to deploy staff across the service in accordance with people’s needs. People and staff told us they felt there were times when staffing levels in the home were insufficient. Medicines and creams were managed and administered safely. Recruitment processes were in place, these included checks with the applicant’s previous employers and disclosure and barring service (DBS).

The service was well-led, there were governance systems in place to identify errors and omissions and the registered manager was aware of their responsibility to act in an open and transparent way. Staff we spoke with talked about people in a person-centred way and there was a clear staffing structure in place. The provider had built links with local organisations and worked in partnership with others to improve the experiences of people. People and relatives were provided with opportunities to feedback their experiences of the service.

Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was good (published July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk