Jubilee House

Updated 25 February 2022

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice is safe and that services are compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 14 February 2022 and was announced. We gave the service three days’ notice of the inspection.

Updated 25 February 2022

Jubilee House is a residential care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 25 people, some living with dementia. There were 24 people living in the service when we inspected on 4 and 6 April 2017. This was an unannounced inspection.

A registered manager was in post at the time of our inspection. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. They were supported by a deputy head of care who was also the registered manager of the provider’s other service Seckford Alms. This service provided personal care to people living in very sheltered flats. Both of the provider’s services were located within the Alms House building. The management team worked closely together and staff were experienced at working across both services. This supported continuity of care within the organisation and embedded the (provider’s) ‘Seckford Standards’ of involvement, compassion, dignity and respect in their practice.

At our last inspection 14 December 2014 we rated the service overall good and found responsive to be outstanding. At this inspection we found that the service had continued to develop and improve. People were at the heart of the service and received exceptional care that was personalised to them, taking account of their needs and wishes. People told us how staff went the extra mile to make sure that they were extremely satisfied with all aspects of their care.

Jubilee House was exceptionally well led. There was visible and effective leadership within the service. The service was effectively organised and well run with an open and transparent culture. The registered manager demonstrated a holistic approach and had clear oversight of how the service was meeting people’s physical, emotional and social needs. They were able to effectively demonstrate how their robust quality assurance systems had sustained continual development and improvement at the service. They were clear about their expectations relating to how the service should be provided and led by example.

Ensuring people received tailored care which enhanced their quality of life was integral to the running of the service. An enabling and supportive culture focused on meeting the individual needs of people had been established and was reflected in people’s care records. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and promoted their independence. They demonstrated an enhanced understanding about people’s choices, views and preferences and acted on what they said.

Staff were extremely compassionate, attentive and caring in their interactions with people. Staff understood the importance of obtaining consent when providing care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People and or their representatives, where appropriate, were actively involved in making decisions about their care arrangements. This led to people experiencing an excellent service which was distinctive to their individual needs.

People were encouraged to maintain relationships that mattered to them such as family, community and other social links. They were supported to pursue their hobbies and to participate in activities of their choice. This protected people from the risks of social isolation and loneliness.

The service provided outstanding end of life care. People experienced a comfortable, dignified death in line with their wishes

Staff enjoyed their jobs and understood their roles and responsibilities. They were passionate and committed to delivering a high standard of care. They were positive about the way the service was managed, how they were supported and encouraged to professionally develop.

There were sufficient numbers of staff, who had been recruited safely, and who had the skills and knowledge to provide care to people in the way they preferred. Retention of staff was good and supported continuity of care.

There were robust procedures and processes to ensure the safety of the people who used the service. These included risk assessments which identified how the risks to people were minimised but also ensured their rights and choices were respected.

Staff had received safeguarding training and understood what actions to take to protect people from abuse. They were able to confidently describe the different types of abuse that may occur and how it should be reported.

Where people required assistance to take their medicines there were appropriate arrangements in place to provide this support safely.

People were encouraged and supported to attend appointments with health care professionals to maintain their health and well-being. Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to voice their concerns if they were unhappy with the care they received. Feedback including comments, concerns and complaints were appropriately investigated and responded to and used to improve the quality of the service.

The registered manager demonstrated an open, reflective management style working collaboratively with other agencies and professionals to drive continual improvement within the care sector. Feedback from healthcare professionals cited collaborative and effective working relationships.