Adelaide House Nursing Home

Updated 3 July 2019

The inspection

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 Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

Two inspectors carried out the inspection.

Service and service type

Adelaide House Nursing Home is a care home with nursing. 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.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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. The service also had a home manager who manages the day to day running of the service with the support of the registered manager.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service and five relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with eight members of staff including the activities coordinator, two carers, the registered manager, the home manager, the director of care, a housekeeper and the chef. We spoke with a visiting physiotherapist.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found for example we looked at training records. We received feedback by email from a commissioner and a pharmacist, both gave their permission for us to quote them in this report.

Updated 3 July 2019

About the service

Adelaide House is a care home with nursing that is registered to provide personal and nursing care and accommodation. At the time of the inspection 32 people aged 65 and over were living at the service. The service can support up to 40 people. People living at the home had physical health conditions related to old age and frailty such as diabetes and sensory impairment. The property is an adapted building with accommodation on three floors, offices on the fourth floor and a lift connecting each floor.

The service had two beds that were purchased by the local authority for reablement called Discharge to Assess (D2A). This programme provides people with care and rehabilitation support for up to six-weeks following discharge from hospital. The aim is to enable people to regain skills and confidence, so they can return home with a package of care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt cared for and we observed friendly interactions between people and staff. A relative told us, “I can’t fault the staff, they are kind, caring and attentive, I visit often and see that people get plenty of attention, we can visit whenever we want and are always made to feel welcome. Mum couldn’t be in a better place.” People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.

At the last inspection we reported that maintaining people’s dignity was an area of improvement. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made. People were treated with respect. People’s privacy was upheld, and their dignity was maintained. A visiting physiotherapist told us, “Staff are very aware of the importance of privacy, staff bring in privacy screens if a person receives support from me in communal areas.”

People had a range of activities available that met their needs and reflected their interests. People showed us art they had made and vegetables they had grown together in the garden. People spent time how they wished, we observed people reading a book, chatting with each other or doing a crossword puzzle.

Care plans guided staff about people’s needs and how to meet them. Relatives told us that staff had supported their relative to achieve good outcomes in communication, nursing needs and emotional wellbeing.

Staff, people and relatives told us they were given opportunities to give their views on the service such as through questionnaires and resident and relative meetings. People and relatives knew how to make a complaint and felt confident that their feedback was listened to and acted upon. A person told us, “ is great, he is always here. You can talk to him and he listens.”

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, to give the support they needed and to spend quality time with them. Staff told us they felt valued and took pride in the care and support they provided.

People’s medicines were managed safely. A pharmacist told us, “The staff are extremely efficient, courteous and helpful...their record keeping has always seemed excellent and the staff are well informed about the patients, their needs and medications.”

Before they came to live at the home, people’s needs were fully assessed to ensure that staff could meet their needs appropriately. People had access to a range of healthcare professionals and services.

Staff knew what action to take if they had any concerns about people’s safety or welfare. People’s risks were identified and assessed appropriately. No-one living at the home required end of life care at the time of the inspection, but people’s wishes, and preferences were recorded.

People were supported by staff whose suitability was checked through a robust recruitment process. Staff completed relevant training and were experienced in their roles to provide effective care to people. Staff told us they felt well supported, received regular supervisions and an annual appraisal.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published on 12 August 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.