Ottley House

Ottley House is a nursing home providing personal and nursing care to up to a maximum of 70 people. The service provides support to older persons including those living with dementia. The home is divided in to 2 separate wings and people have access to outside space. At the time of our inspection there were 66 people using the service.

People’s experience of the service and what we found:

People received person centred care and their health needs were assessed and well monitored. People and their relatives were encouraged to be part of the care planning process and the provider supported people to maintain their relationships and independence where possible.

Risks to people’s safety were considered and any identified issues were quickly addressed. People’s medicine was well managed and external agencies were engaged when needed.

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.

People were treated with kindness and their dignity respected. People told us they felt safe and confident to speak up if they had any concerns. People were supported to maintain interests which were important to them. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who received training and supervision relevant to their role.

There were robust governance systems in place and a culture of learning adopted to ensure the care people received was in line with best practice. The home was adapted to meet people’s needs and kept clean and tidy.

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 29 January 2018)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service and the time passed since our last inspection.

Follow Up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

We found the following examples of good practice.

• On arrival at the home there were clear instructions for all visitors to follow. This included hand sanitising and the use of face masks. Additionally, visitors completed a rapid Covid-19 test and had their temperature checked to ensure their visit could take place safely in line with current guidance.

• People were supported to maintain contact with others who were important to them in a variety of ways including a 'visiting pod'. Use of the area meant visits took place safely which reduced the risk of cross infection.

• Some furniture in communal areas had been rearranged to encourage people to socially distance.

• Staff members were emotionally supported. This included signposting staff to a confidential helpline for advice during the pandemic.

• Staff used personal protection equipment appropriately and had access to additional supplies if needed.

• An extra staff room had been created which meant staff could appropriately socially distance during their breaks.

• The registered manager and infection prevention lead monitored staff compliance with the provider's infection control policy.

Ottley House is a ‘care home’. 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. Ottley House provides accommodation with nursing care for up to 72 people. The home is purpose built and all accommodation is on ground floor level. Bedrooms are for single occupancy and have en-suite facilities. The home consists of two separate units; The Ann Carter unit provides general nursing care and the Memory Lane unit provides care for people who are living with dementia.

At the time of the inspection there were 67 people living at the home.

At the last inspection in June 2016, the service was rated Good

At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall with Requires Improvement for the Effective key question.

People were supported by adequate numbers of staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff knew how to protect people from the risk of harm and abuse. There were systems in place to identify and manage risks and to protect people from harm or abuse. People received their medicines when they needed them and medicines were stored and managed in a safe way.

Most people continued to receive effective care. However due to recent incidents, improvement was required in this area to ensure people’s health care needs were monitored and met. People were supported by staff who were well trained. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were cared for by staff who were kind and considerate. There was a cheerful atmosphere in the home and people were supported in a relaxed and unhurried manner.

People continued to receive a service which was responsive to their needs and preferences. Staff knew what was important to the people they supported and people were involved in planning and reviewing the care they received. There was a varied programme of activities for people if they wanted to join in. Complaints were taken seriously.

Staff told us the management within the home were open and approachable. The registered manager and provider continually monitored the quality of the service and made improvements where needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Ottley House is registered to provide accommodation with nursing and personal care to a maximum of 72 people. There were 67 people living at the home on the day of our inspection. People were cared for on two units, the Ann Carter unit which provides nursing care and the Memory Lane unit which provides care for people with dementia.

A registered manager was in post and was present during our inspection. 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 felt safe living at Ottley House and felt safe when staff supported them. Staff protected people from abuse, discrimination and avoidable harm and understood action they would need to take if these occurred. Concerns that were raised about people’s safety were dealt with quickly and referred to the appropriate agencies.

There were enough staff to safely meet the needs of people. People were not kept waiting for support and a reduction in the use of agency had helped to ensure a consistency of staff. Any risks to people and their environment were managed through regular assessment and monitoring. Staff had good knowledge of the risks people faced, how to reduce these risks and clear plans were in place which staff followed.

People felt well cared for and staff demonstrated affection and warmth when supporting them. People’s privacy and dignity was respected and people and staff had developed positive relationships with each other. Staff knew people’s individual needs and made sure people understood the choices available to them. People were given information in a way they could understand and staff gave people time to respond and communicate.

The provider had introduced a new programme to enhance dementia care. This had improved the well-being of people who lived in the Memory Lane unit.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and support to effectively meet the specific needs of people. Staff training and development was invested in to make sure they had the skills and knowledge to carry out their roles.

People’s right to make their own decisions and give their consent to their care and treatment was sought and respected. Where people could not make their own decisions staff made sure these were made in their best interests and involved families and other professionals where necessary.

People enjoyed the food they received and had choices of what they ate and drank. People were provided with enough well-balanced food and drink which helped to make sure their nutritional needs were met.

People were encouraged to spend their time how they wanted to. A range of events took place at the home which most people enjoyed and took part in. Staff also spent one to one time with people to support them with whatever they wanted to do.

Staff were proud to work at the home and they were enthusiastic about their roles within the home and the improvements that had been made since our last inspection.

Good leadership was demonstrated at all levels and there were systems in place which assessed and monitored the quality and safety of care provided.

People who used the service and their representatives told us they were happy with the care and support they received.

Each person had a care plan with up to date information about the care and support they needed and people told us, "Nothing is too much trouble; the staff help me with the things I can't manage".

Staff were aware of how to respond to any allegation of abuse in a way that safeguarded vulnerable adults.

The provider had effective recruitment procedures in place.

We found the home to be clean and regular checks had been carried out to ensure the required standards of cleanliness and infection control.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

People told us that the staff were, 'All good', and that they were, 'All friendly'. Relatives were also complimentary about the service. One told us that 'Everyone was so lovely', and 'Nothing is too much trouble'.

We saw that staff were respectful and kind to people. We saw staff taking time to understand people's needs. Staff told us that they sometimes felt a little rushed when they were busy.

We found that care plans were detailed and gave staff the information they needed to provide support for people. People's needs and preferences were clearly recorded. Staff told us that they preferred not to switch between the two units within the home because they were not always as familiar with the people they were caring for in the other unit.

We found that the staff had received a range of training to support them in their roles. We also found that the home had robust systems in place to ensure that the quality of service was maintained or improved.