You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 27 November 2020

We found the following examples of good practice:

¿ People were supported to have friends and family visit them safely. The home had adapted rooms to enable people to be in the same room as their visitor, either side of a clear screen. The visitor rooms were cleaned thoroughly before and after every visit.

¿ People were involved in regular meetings to update them about COVID-19 and the infection prevention and control measures in the home. People were supported to continue to participate in social engagement activities, in small groups and on a one-to-one basis. The communal areas of the home had been laid out to promote safe social distancing.

¿ People moving into the home were supported to be tested for COVID-19 and to isolate for the required period. Regular COVID-19 testing took place for people and staff. This was thoroughly monitored by the registered manager and infection control lead staff member.

¿ Visitors and staff were required to have their temperature taken upon entering the home. They were then directed to wash their hands and put on personal protective equipment (PPE). The PPE available included facial coverings, gloves and aprons. Visitors were provided with a gown to limit the contact between their clothing and the furnishings in the home. These had been made and donated by a local community group and were washed between uses.

¿ The home was clean throughout. There were thorough and well monitored cleaning schedules in place. These included cleaning all touch points throughout the home multiple times per day. For example, the lift control buttons, light switches and door handles. Staff had received additional training around COVID-19 and infection prevention and control.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas



Updated 27 November 2020

We were assured the service were following safe infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe.



Updated 21 December 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had suitable skills and received training to ensure they could meet the needs of the people they cared for. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet.

People�s health needs were assessed and staff supported people to stay healthy. Staff worked well with specialist nurses and GPs to ensure people�s health needs were met.

Staff understood whether people were able to consent to their care and treatment and took appropriate action where people did not have capacity to consent.



Updated 21 December 2017

The service was caring.

People spoke positively about staff and the care they received. This was supported by what we observed.

Care was delivered in a way that took account of people�s individual needs and in ways that maximised their independence.

Staff provided care in a way that maintained people�s dignity and upheld their rights. People�s privacy was protected and they were treated with respect.



Updated 21 December 2017

The service was responsive.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their care. Staff had clear information about people�s needs and how to meet them.

People told us they knew how to raise any concerns or complaints and were confident that they would be taken seriously.

Staff supported people to set out what they wanted at the end of their life. There was clear information about people�s wishes, which staff followed.



Updated 21 December 2017

The service was well led.

There was a registered manager who promoted the values of the service, which were focused on providing individual, quality care. The registered manager ensured these values were implemented by the staff team.

Systems were in place to review incidents and audit performance, to help identify any themes, trends or lessons to be learned.

Quality assurance systems involved people who use the service, their representatives and staff. They were used to improve the quality of the service provided.