Vi and John Rubens House

Updated 23 March 2023

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 Health and Social Care Act 2008.

This was a targeted inspection to check on potential concerns that was identified following a review of the service.

As part of this inspection, we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Vi and John Rubens House 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.

Registered Manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make.

We reviewed the information we already held about the service. This included previous reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 6 people, 1 volunteer, the head of care service, registered manager, the deputy manager and 3 staff members. We reviewed 5 risk assessments for people at risk of skin complications, consent forms, call bell records and quality assurance records.

Updated 23 March 2023

We carried out an unannounced inspection of this service on 11 and 12 December 2018. Vi and John Rubens House provides accommodation and nursing care and can support up to 105 older people. The service is run by Jewish Care, a voluntary organisation. At the time of our inspection 83 people were living at the service.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. This service provides personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service has a registered manager in post. 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.

At our last inspection on 19 May 2016 the service was rated ‘Good'. At this inspection we found that this service continued to be ‘Good.’

Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had a clear understanding of how to report abuse and protect people from harm. A recommendation was made to review best practice guidelines and ensure policies were updated to ensure staff knew how to keep people safe. Risk assessments were in place and gave details about how to support people in a safe way. Staff were recruited in a safe manner. Staffing levels were sufficient, so the service could meet people's needs. Medicines were administered and managed safely. We made a recommendation to review best practice guidelines and ensure policies guide staff to manage medicines in a safe way. Infection control was being managed to prevent the spread of infection. Accidents and incidents were recorded and lessons were learnt to improve the running of the service.

The service had been designed and adapted with people’s support needs in mind. Pre-admission assessments had been completed for all people to ensure their needs could be met. Staff received a detailed induction to the service and ongoing training to allow them to provide effective care and support to people. Staff felt supported and received regular supervisions and an annual appraisal. People spoke positively about mealtimes and the service worked well with other health and social care teams to ensure people were supported to stay healthy and well. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA is a law protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. Where people did not have the capacity to consent to their care and support, the appropriate applications had been made.

Staff were kind and respectful and knew how to communicate with people with different support needs. Staff demonstrated an understanding around equality and diversity. People and their relatives were fully involved in their care and support provided. Staff maintained people's privacy and dignity and the service promoted people to be as independent as possible.

People received personalised support and each person had an up to date care plan. People were encouraged to engage in activities. However, we did not see evidence of sufficient activities available for people who were in their bedroom. A recommendation was made to follow best practice guidelines and ensure all people felt they had an opportunity to participate in meaningful activities. People and their relatives felt comfortable raising complaints and all complaints were appropriately responded to. The service provided end of life care that took into consideration individual wishes.

People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager. The service gathered feedback from people, relatives and staff. This service completed quality checks to ensure the service was always improving the quality of care provided.