You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The inspection took place on 15 December 2018 and was unannounced.

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

Castle Farm Care Home is registered to accommodate 22 older people. The home is split over two floors with the first floor having access via stairs or a lift. On the ground floor there is a large lounge, known as the parlour, conservatory and a separate dining room. There was level access to the outside patio area at the rear. There were 14 people living at the home at the time of inspection.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Staff had received an induction and continual learning that enabled them to carry out their role effectively. Staff received regular supervision and felt supported, appreciated and confident in their work. People and their relatives had been involved in assessments of care needs and had their choices and wishes respected including access to healthcare when required. The service worked well with professionals such as doctors, nurses and social workers. However, the home did not always meet the requirements of the MCA. We have made a recommendation about the assessment of capacity and recording of best interest decisions.

People were protected from avoidable harm as staff received training and understood how to recognise signs of abuse. Staff told us who they would report this to both internally and externally. Staffing levels were sufficient to provide safe care and recruitment checks had ensured staff were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. When people were at risk staff had access to assessments and understood the actions needed to minimise avoidable harm. Medicines were administered and managed safely by trained and competent staff.

Staff were clear on their responsibilities with regards to infection prevention and control and this contributed to keeping people safe. Accident and incidents were recorded and analysed. Lessons learnt were shared with staff by the electronic care planning handset, handovers or during monthly meetings.

People had their eating and drinking needs understood and were being met. People told us they enjoyed the food and thought the variety and quantity was good.

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, their relatives and professionals described the staff as caring, kind and approachable. People had their dignity, privacy and independence respected.

People had their care needs met by staff who were knowledgeable about how they were able to communicate their needs. Their life histories were detailed and relatives had been consulted. The home had an effective complaints process and people were aware of it and knew how to make a complaint. The home actively encouraged feedback from people, their relatives and professionals. People’s end of life needs were included in their care and support plans. Feedback received by the service showed that end of life care provided was of a good standard. Activities were provided and these included staff, people and their relatives. Individual activities were provided for those that preferred them.

Relatives and professionals had confidence in the service. The home had an open and positive culture that encouraged the involvement of everyone. Leadership was visible

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The service remains good.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The service remains good.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The service remains good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The service remains good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 18 January 2019

The service remains good.