Caldy Manor

Updated 13 March 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 2 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 13 March 2021

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 22 January 2019. Caldy Manor provides personal care and accommodation for up to 38 older people.

Caldy Manor is a listed building set in its own gardens in Caldy Woods just off the main road through Caldy Village. The home is decorated to a good standard throughout with accommodation provided across four floors. A passenger lift enables access to bedrooms located on the upper floors. All bedrooms are single occupancy with en-suite facilities. Specialised bathing facilities are also available. On the ground floor, there is a communal lounge and dining room with access to a garden and patio area. The lower ground floor of the home is called 'Memory Lane' and is reserved for people who require more support from staff with daily living activities.

There was no registered manager in post, as the manager had left a few weeks before the inspection. The home were actively recruiting for a new manger. 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.' A deputy manager was acting as home manager at the time of the inspection and participated fully in the inspection visit.

At the last inspection in July 2016 the service was rated overall as good, and in each of the key questions: is the service effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The key question safe was rated as requires improvement.

At this inspection, we found improvements had been made following the last inspection. We rated the key question: is the service responsive as outstanding. We rated the key questions: is the service safe, effective, caring and well led as good. The service overall, has remained good.

The management of medicines had been improved since the last inspection and we found medicines were safely managed and robust checks were in place to identify and take actions when shortfalls were identified.

The provider ensured people had access to a wide range of meaningful activities. This included trips out to places that people said they wanted to visit and parties and events. We saw many examples of where the involvement of the local community had enabled people to feel included and part of their community once again. People told us they looked forward to things and felt excited by activities, visits and events at the service. This demonstrated activities were truly meaningful for people.

People and their relatives gave consistent, positive feedback about the service. This included the approach of staff, the food, the events that took place in the home and the accommodation.

People were helped to exercise support and control over their lives. People were supported to consent to care and make decisions. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 had been followed.

People had access to sufficient quantities of nutritious food and drink. People's special dietary needs were catered for and people's preferences were noted and acted upon. Everyone we spoke with said the food was “excellent”. We observed the serving of lunch. The food looked and smelled appetising and was served pleasantly by staff.

Staff were recruited robustly and safely. They received training which ensured they were up to date with the skills required for their roles. New staff received an in-depth induction to the service which included the support of more experienced staff.

Risk assessments and risk management plans were in place. Personal care was delivered in line with assessed needs and accurate monitoring records were maintained.

We looked at how accidents and incidents were managed and found that they were recorded and reported appropriately. We saw that appropriate actions were taken following incidents, such as contacting the GP, emergency services or referral to other professionals. We also saw evidence of learning from incidents being shared with staff through supervision.

Systems were in place for monitoring quality and safety. Where shortfalls or areas for further improvements were identified these were acted upon.

People were still supported by caring staff who showed genuine compassion and respect to those living in the home. We saw lots of positive interactions with staff and people, and we could see people enjoyed the company of staff. The chef spent time in the dining area ensuring people were enjoying the food, and just chatting to people about their day.

The management team had maintained an open and supportive culture in the home. Staff and people using the service told us they felt the managers were approachable and accommodating. Staff told us they were happy going to work and enjoyed their jobs. One staff member told us she had left the home, but returned within a week as she missed the staff and people living in the home so much.