Galanos House

We found the following examples of good practice.

There was a focus on promoting positive mental health for staff through well-being initiatives. The registered manager arranged for staff to be trained as mental health first aiders who could provide support to both staff and people. A book club, walking group, art club and tai chi was started as a result of well-being days.

Staff ensured that people in isolation had the opportunity to speak to their families every day, and spent time engaged in meaningful activities to promote positive wellbeing.

Visiting procedures were communicated regularly and any changes contained in a monthly newsletter. Negative lateral flow and temperature checks were required before entry to the home alongside a health screening questionnaire.

Staff and essential care givers were trained in how to use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) safely in care homes and staff competency was monitored through spot checks and observations.

Galanos House provides accommodation and nursing care for up to 91 people. There are three units providing residential, nursing and care for those living with dementia. The unit for those living with dementia is called Poppy Lodge. There were 88 people living at the home at the time of our inspection visit.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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.

At our last inspection in March 2015, we rated the service as outstanding. At this inspection we found the service had continued to develop and further strengthened a very caring approach and the effectiveness, responsiveness and leadership of the home. People continued to receive excellent care in a community where they felt valued and had a sense of belonging.

Galanos House was exceptionally well-led. The registered manager, supported by the deputy manager, had a strong sense of providing people with an enhanced quality of life which took into account individual wishes and beliefs so each person was valued and treated with equality. This inclusive ethos enabled people to carry on living their lives, pursuing their interests and maintaining and building important relationships. The managers acted as role models for the staff team who were motivated to offer care that was kind, considerate and put people at the heart of everything they did.

The management team were proactive in driving the service forward to improve outcomes for people both within the home and the local community. They worked in partnership with key organisations, both locally and nationally, to support care provision, service development and joined up care.

The provider understood the need to provide staff with the skills, knowledge and tools to provide care that followed best practice. They had an improvement plan to invest in staff development so staff had the motivation and confidence to provide innovative care which promoted people's wellbeing and meant they had a meaningful life.

Staff treated each person as an individual and respected their life history and experiences. Staff knew about people and who and what was important to them and significant events in their lives. They focussed on the uniqueness of each person rather than labelling them with a diagnosis or condition. Staff were able to tell us how they used their knowledge of people to engage and respond to them to show they were valued and to make their lives better. Staff supported people to maintain relationships and build memories with family and friends who were important to them.

People had access to purposeful and meaningful occupation that was personal to them. People’s skills, knowledge and expertise were recognised, celebrated and encouraged.

The home had sufficient staff to meet the individual needs and preferences of the people living there. Staff were recruited after the provider had completed the necessary checks to make sure they were suitable to work at the home. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise any concerns they had about people through safeguarding procedures.

Care plans provided staff with information about risks to people’s health and wellbeing. Risk assessments took into account people’s individual needs and abilities and encouraged people to maintain independence where possible. Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely.

People were supported by staff who understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They gave people maximum choice and involved them in decisions about their care. By understanding people's history and motivations they were able to provide care in the least restrictive way possible.

The provider's quality assurance system involved asking people, relatives and staff about their experience of the service. The provider understood where improvements were needed and had plans in place to achieve these to ensure people continued to receive excellent standards of care.

We observed a relaxed atmosphere in the home with lots of interaction between people who live in the home, the staff and visitors. We saw that staff were patient, helpful and respectful to people in the home. We found that peoples' health care needs were being met. We looked at care records and saw that they were comprehensive and reflected the care given.

People we spoke with told us that they were consulted about their care and gave consent for procedures and treatment to be carried out. We looked at medications and found that they were stored and administered safely and recorded correctly. People told us that they received their medication at the correct time.

We found that there was a robust system of assessing and recording care and that records were stored correctly and securely and disposed of appropriately.

Some of the people who lived at Galanos House were unable to express their views verbally, so we spent time observing how staff supported them. We were however able to speak with seven people who used the service to obtain their views.

We also spoke with two relatives, the senior nurse in charge of the nursing floor, the manager and four care staff on the day of our visit.

We saw consent to care and treatment had been signed by either the person who used the service or their representative.

People who used the service and their representative told us they had been involved in their care planning or that of their relative.

We saw people's care files contained up to date information and these had been regularly reviewed.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe at Galanos House. They said 'Care staff treat me with dignity and I definitely feel safe.'

We looked at training records and we saw not all staff had received training in key elements. The manager told us further training had been arranged.

We were told by care staff that they met regularly with their manager.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care at Galanos House. People who lived at the home were given the opportunity to discuss the day to day running of the home with the manager.