You are here

Archived: Pilgrim Homes - Framland Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 30 January 2016

This inspection took place on 7 and 8 December 2015 and was unannounced. Pilgrim Homes Framland provides accommodation for 23 people who require personal care without nursing. 21 people were living in the home at the time of our inspection. The home cares for elderly protestant Christians.

Pilgrim Homes Framland is set over two floors. The home has a large lounge and a separate dining room. There were other seating areas around the home for people to sit in. The home had an enclosed garden.

A registered manager was in place as required by their conditions of registration. 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.

People told us they felt safe living in the home. This was confirmed by relatives. Risks for individual people had been assessed. Staff were knowledgeable on how best to support people when they were at risk of harm. Staff had been trained to support and protect the people they cared for. People were protected against abuse because staff knew how to report any concerns of abuse to the relevant safeguarding authorities. Policies to protect people were in place to give staff guidance.

People’s medicines were managed and administered appropriately, however the stock levels of medicines held in the home was not recorded. We were told that checking of the medicine stock levels would be added to their monthly audit. Appropriate cleaning and systems to prevent the spread of infections were in place.

People and their relatives were positive about the care and support they received from staff. They were involved in planning for their care. Their individual needs were assessed, planned and reviewed but did not always provide staff with adequate guidance. We were told this would be reviewed by the registered manager. People were encouraged to make decisions about their care and support. They were supported to maintain their health and well-being and access additional care and treatment from other health care services when needed.

Staff were passionate about their role. People were at the heart of the service. Both the people and their relatives complimented the caring nature of staff. We received many positive comments about the home. Whilst people’s spiritual needs were met, they did not always have the opportunity to take part in other recreational activities. However, the registered manager was reviewing the activities provision as part of the company’s Dementia Strategy as the home is a pilot home for this.

The registered manager and provider had a good understanding of their role and how to manage the quality of the care provided to people. Quality monitoring systems were in place to check and address any shortfalls in the service. People and their relatives felt that any concerns raised were dealt with immediately. There were sufficient numbers of staff to ensure people’s needs were being met. Staff had been suitably recruited and trained to carry out their role.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 30 January 2016

The service was safe.

People and their relatives were positive about the care they received and felt safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in reporting any allegations or incidents of abuse.

People�s risks and safety were assessed and managed to protect people from harm.

People were protected by safe and appropriate systems in handling and administrating their medicines, however the medicine stock levels were not recorded.

Effective recruitment procedures were in place to ensure people were being supported by suitable staff.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 January 2016

The service was effective.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and support; however assessments of people�s mental capacity to make some decisions were variable.

When people�s needs had changed they were referred to the appropriate health and social care professional. People�s dietary needs and preferences were met.

Staff were supported and trained to ensure their skills and knowledge was current and met people�s needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 January 2016

The service was caring.

People and their relatives highly praised the staff. Staff were kind and compassionate to the people they cared for. They treated people individually and with dignity.

People were encouraged to remain independent and express their views.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 30 January 2016

The service was not always responsive.

People�s spiritual needs were met. However there were limited opportunities for individual and recreational activities although this was being addressed.

People�s care needs were assessed, recorded and reviewed. However, some people�s care records did not provide staff with adequate guidance.

Staff responded promptly to people�s individual concerns and understood their needs. Relatives told us their concerns were listened to by staff and acted on.

Well-led

Good

Updated 30 January 2016

The service was well- led.

People and their relatives spoke highly of the staff and the registered manager. Staff felt supported by the provider and registered manager. The culture of the home was fair and open.

The quality of care was being regularly monitored and checked.