You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 December 2018

At the last inspection on 5 May 2015, the service was rated as Outstanding. This comprehensive unannounced inspection was carried out on 30 October 2018. At this inspection, the overall rating is Good.

The service is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/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.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

Cheviot Nursing Home is registered to support 33 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. On the date of our inspection, 28 people were being supported by the service.

People and their relatives were very complimentary about the service. They told us it was a safe place to live. Staff understood their responsibilities and knew how to safeguard and protect people from harm.

There was a system in place to assess risks to people’s health and wellbeing, however, these were not always appropriately recorded and reviewed in a timely manner. We have recommended that the provider review their system to ensure records were completed in a timely way.

Staff were recruited appropriately. Checks had been undertaken so that people were kept safe. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet the needs of people who used the service.

People received their medicines as prescribed and medicines were managed safely. Infection control processes were in place to minimise the risks and spread of infection.

Staff were well supported and received induction, training and supervision to carry out their role. People had sufficient food and drink and were provided with choices at meal times. Access to healthcare services to maintain people's health and well-being was provided.

People’s capacity to make their own choices and decisions were recorded and they or their representatives were involved in important decisions about their lives. However, some information was unclear and confusing. We have recommended that the service look at best practice guidance in relation to capacity and risk to ensure that high quality care is provided to everyone in the service.

The premises were purpose built and had been extended and adapted to meet people's needs. People had comfortable rooms which were personalised to their taste.

The staff were very caring, kind and compassionate. They knew people extremely well and were sensitive to their needs. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and staff treated them with dignity and courtesy. Staff ensured people’s privacy was maintained and respected.

People received a service from staff who responded to them with excellent care and attention. Care plans were individual and recorded people’s diverse needs, wishes and preferences. People were actively involved in developing the service they received and feedback from them and their relatives about the service was very complimentary.

People had opportunities to participate and pursue their own leisure interests. One to one and group activities and events were offered and people could choose to get involved. Volunteers provided support, company and entertainment.

Information on how to raise concerns or complaints was available and people and their relatives were confident that any concerns they had would be listened to and acted upon.

End of life care for people and their families was outstanding. The service had achieved the Gold Standard Framework and had been commended for the quality of its care for people at the end of their life.

The management team were visible in the service and we

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 December 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people were identified, managed and reviewed to help keep people safe.

People were cared for by sufficient staff who had been appropriately recruited.

People received their medicines as prescribed.

Infection control practices were in place.

Lessons were learnt and improvements made to the service as a result.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 December 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received the training, supervision and support they needed to deliver effective care to people.

People had a choice of meals and drinks and mealtimes were an enjoyable experience.

They were supported to maintain their health and well-being, including accessing healthcare services when required.

People’s needs were met by the design and decoration of the premises.

People were supported to make their own decisions and choices. The registered provider was acting in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated guidance.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 December 2018

The service was caring.

Staff knew people well and were warm, kind and compassionate.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

People were supported to maintain their relationships, lifestyle and independence.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 21 December 2018

The service was very responsive.

People were supported by a staff team who were highly skilled and motivated. People had maximum choice and control over their lives.

Staff were extremely knowledgeable about people's needs and how to support them.

There were effective systems in place to deal with concerns and complaints.

People and their families received outstanding end of life care and support from the staff.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 December 2018

The service was well led.

The registered manager and care manager promoted an open and positive culture in the service.

The views of people, relatives and staff were sought to drive continuous improvement.

Quality assurance processes were in place to regularly review the quality of the service. Senior management strived to improve the quality of care people received.

The staff worked in close liaison with other specialist providers to ensure people had joined up high quality care.