• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Granville Court

4 Granville Court, The Esplanade, Hornsea, Humberside, HU18 1NQ (01964) 532160

Provided and run by:
East Riding of Yorkshire Council

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

14 January 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection was carried out as a follow up inspection.

Our inspector visited the service and the information they collected helped answer two of

our five questions: Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is

the service responsive? Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during

the inspection, speaking with the staff and from looking at records. If you want to see the

evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Health and safety and some maintenance checks had been completed. This helped to make sure the home was safe for people.

Staffing levels had been reviewed and new staff were in the process of being employed. This helped to make sure there were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.

Is the service effective?

Not applicable.

Is the service caring?

Not applicable

Is the service responsive?

Not applicable.

Is the service well-led?

New quality systems were in place and actions had been taken place to help make sure effective monitoring of the home was undertaken. This helped to identify any areas of improvement to make sure people's needs were fully and safely met.

30 September 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection was carried out as a follow up inspection.

Our inspector visited the service and the information they collected helped answer two of our five questions: Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with the staff and from looking at records. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Health and safety checks and maintenance had not been completed in order to make sure people lived in an appropriate and safe environment.

Staffing levels had not been consistently ensured to make sure people's needs were fully met.

We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to health and safety and staffing.

Is the service effective?

Not applicable.

Is the service caring?

Not applicable

Is the service responsive?

Not applicable.

Is the service well-led?

There was a new manager in post but they were not registered with the Commission. There was no effective quality assurance system in place. Audits of the home had not been completed to help the provider make sure they were confident people's needs were being safely met.

We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to health and safety and staffing.

20 May 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection was part of Humber NHS Trust and not a stand-alone ASC inspection.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

Is the service safe? , Is the service effective? , Is the service caring? , Is the service responsive? , Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found -

Is the service safe?

We were told there was a shortage of cooks due to long term illness. This was putting extra pressure on the care staff who had to cook meals for the people who used the service. Nursing staff expressed concerns related to the nutritional content of the food because of the circumstances they found themselves in.

Staff members we spoke with described Humber as a 'Good Trust and the training is good.' There was mandatory training provided but if a relevant course was identified by staff, it could be requested.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) become important when a person is judged to lack the capacity to make an informed decision related to their care and treatment. DoLS are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They aim to make sure that people in care homes, hospitals and supported living are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. The safeguards should ensure that a care home, hospital or supported living arrangement only deprives someone of their liberty in a safe and correct way, and that this is only done when it is in the best interests of the person and there is no other way to look after them. The provider told us no applications for DoLS had been made but knew the procedure to be followed if an application needed to be made which helped ensure the provider acted in accordance with people`s best interests.

Improvements to the environment were required to make sure it was safe for people. This included some refurbishment and upgrading.

Is the service effective?

Before any person was admitted to Granville Court, they had undergone a pre-admission assessment. Qualified learning disability nursing staff conducted the assessments. This meant that people`s care needs had been identified and Granville Lodge had staff members who had the skills and knowledge to meet the person`s needs.

Families were able to visit at any time but they were asked not to come in at mealtimes to protect people`s dignity. Family members were involved in the person`s care planning and were able to take people out if they so wished.

Is the service caring?

We randomly selected four care plans which included a mixture of people who had lived in the home a long time, and more recent admissions. A care plan outlined the care provided to an individual. It guided the ongoing provision of care and assisted in the evaluation of that care.

We found plans were untidy and inconsistent in regard to their content. They were generally person centred but record keeping was of varying quality. It was not clear if the notes had been written by staff members from the Trust or from the local authority. This may have impacted on the continuity of care provided to the person who used the service.

Some plans contained a `patient passport` which included basic information related to the person`s health needs. Some care plans did not include the passport. Relevant risk assessments were last reviewed in August 2013. The risk assessment process identified sensible and proportionate measures to control the risks to people who used the service. The assessment process helped decide whether the provider should be doing more.

Evidence of best interest meetings were observed in three of the four plans we saw. A formal best interests meeting was required to plan the decisions needed where the issues facing the person who used the service were very complex. There may be a range of options and issues that required the considered input of a number of different staff as well as those with a personal and/or legal interest in the needs of the person lacking mental capacity. Making sense of these issues and options may only be properly covered and addressed through holding such a meeting, and clearly recording the discussions.

Is the service responsive?

Staff members were conscious of the importance of keeping people involved in events around the local community. Staff told us, 'We do our best to get residents out and about as much as possible.' Granville Court had the use of a minibus but that was no longer available. Staff told us it would be very helpful to have access to the minibus again as it provided greater flexibility. For example, the community church attended the care home at regular intervals. A minibus would have allowed people who used the service to attend churches in the community. Access to public transport was a possibility, but the practical and logistical arrangements may have proved difficult.

Is the service well led?

Senior managers from the Trust had visited Granville Court. Staff members told us the modern matron kept them informed of any pending changes in procedures. Staff were aware that the management structure was changing but they thought this would work better for the local authority staff. We were told by the matron that regular meetings were held to discuss issues related to budgets, nursing concerns and local authority issues.

8 October 2013

During a routine inspection

Most of the people who used the service had lived at the home for many years and all had both learning and physical disabilities which required special aids and adaptations. There was also one bedroom available for respite care. Due to having a variety of complex needs and communication difficulties, people were not able to tell us directly about their care and treatment.

During the day we sat with the people who used the service and observed their daily activities including lunchtime and observed their interactions with staff. We spoke with staff and reviewed documentation including three care plans.

We saw that care needs were discussed with people, where possible, their relatives or professionals and before people received care their consent was asked for. Comments from the expert by experience included that staff seemed patient and sensitive to peoples' needs and showed an understanding of their likes and dislikes.

From what we observed and noted staff cared for the people who used the service appropriately. Food and drinks were specially prepared to ensure that people had a nutritious and balanced diet.

During our visit we saw that the home looked clean and tidy and there were infection control procedures in place.

The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

Records were found to be accurate, detailed and were reviewed.

31 August 2012

During a routine inspection

People who lived in the home had complex needs and we were unable to verbally communicate with them about their views and experiences. We spent time observing people's day and their interactions with the staff team. Staff were polite and discreet.