You are here

Archived: St Johns Nursing Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 13 October 2016.

The home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for adults. A maximum of 43 people can live at the home. There were 38 people living at home on the day of the inspection. The accommodation is split over three areas. The Limes unit provides care for adults with an enduring mental health condition. The Pines unit provides care for older people, specialising in those with a diagnosis of dementia. There are also three flats to promote independent living for adults with a mental health condition.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 the last inspection on 23 November 2015, the provider needed to make improvements in managing people’s medicines, ensuring that identified areas for improvement where completed and register a manager with the CQC. We found that improvements had been made and there was now a registered manager.

People told us that they were relaxed and felt safe in the home and the staff helped to keep them safe by being there. People were assured by the care staff and care staff told us about how they kept people safe. During our inspection we saw staff were available to respond to people and offered support, guidance or care when needed. People received their medicines from nursing staff as required and records were completed. People told us the staff were available and they did not have to wait for assistance or care.

People told us care staff knew them and their care needs well. All staff told us the their training supported them to care and understand the needs of people who lived at the home. All staff had supervision which they said supported and helped them in providing care to people who lived at the home. People’s rights and freedoms were respected by staff who listened and responded to people’s decisions. People were supported to eat and drink enough to keep them healthy and enjoyed their meals. We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered to meet those needs. People had access to other healthcare professionals that provided treatment, advice and guidance to support their health needs.

People told us that care staff made sure they retained their independent living skills and were encouraged to be involved in their day to day care choices. People were familiar with all staff and had developed relationships of trust. Care staff were respectful when speaking with people and were considerate when talking about people with other staff members. All staff knew it was important to maintain a person’s privacy and dignity when proving personal care or when people were in the communal areas of the home.

Where people had not been able to be involved in the planning of their care due to their capacity to make decisions, relatives and care staff were involved and asked for their opinions and input. All staff offered encouragement and supported people to read or join in group activities and outings. People we spoke with told us they were confident to approach the manager if they were not happy with their care. The registered manager had reviewed and responded to all concerns raised.

People felt involved in their home and had opportunities to make suggestions that were listened to and actioned. Management and staff had implemented recent improvements and these were regularly reviewed to ensure people’s care and support needs continued to be met. The management team were approachable and visible within the home which people liked.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

The service was safe.

People received care and treatment from staff that understood how to keep them safe and free from the risk of potential abuse.

People told us they felt there were enough staff to meet their care and social needs and manage risks. People received their medicines where needed and were supported by staff that meet their care and welfare needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

The service was effective.

People�s needs and preferences were supported by trained staff that understood their care needs. People made or were supported in decisions about their care and support.

People told us that they enjoyed the meals that were made for them and it was what they wanted. People had accessed other health professionals when required to meet their health needs with staff support.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

The service was caring.

People received care that met their needs. Staff provided care that met people�s needs whilst being respectful of their privacy and dignity and took account of people�s individual preferences.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

The service was responsive.

People were supported to make choices and be involved in planning their care. Care plans were in place that showed the care and support people needed.

People who used the service were confident to raise any concerns. These were responded to and action taken if required.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 January 2017

The service was well led.

People knew who the registered manager was and had been asked for their opinion on the quality of the service that they had received.

The provider had checks in place to monitor the quality of the service.