The inspection took place on 19 December 2018 and was unannounced. The last inspection of this service was on 16 and 17 May 2016 and we found the service to be good in all areas. The service is run by Anchor Hanover Group.
Israel Sieff Court is a care home located in the Crumpsall area of Manchester. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home is registered to provide accommodation and support for up to 35 people, some of whom are living with dementia. On the day of inspection, 35 people were living at the home.
The home is divided into three floors. There is access to each floor via a passenger lift and stairwells.
At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the overall rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. At this inspection we found the service remained good overall.
The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager. The registered manager was not available on the day of our inspection and the inspection was facilitated by the deputy manager.
People felt safe living at Israel Sieff Court. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe and felt confident they could report any concerns they had to the registered or deputy manager and they would act upon the concern.
Staff members were recruited safely to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable groups. Staff members received an induction to the service and were given suitable training to allow them to undertake their job role effectively.
The safety of the home was well managed with regular internal and external checks of equipment. A fire risk assessment was in place and personal evacuation plans to assist people to leave the building in an emergency, safely.
Medicines were safely managed and monitored. Staff received regular training and competency checks of medicines administration to ensure they were following best practice.
Accidents and incidents were monitored for patterns and themes. Any learning from accidents and incidents were shared for learning.
People received a full assessment of their needs prior to moving into the service. This fed into care plans and risk assessments to enable people to be supported in a person centred and safe way.
The service worked in line with the Mental Capacity Act, however, we made a recommendation that any conditions made in from authorisations in connection to deprivations of liberty safeguards were fed into care plans.
People were supported to eat and drink. We noted records for eating and drinking were being completed some hours afterwards. Changes to ensure records were completed in real time were actioned on the day of inspection. People were complimentary of the food and told us they had lots of choice. Meals looked appealing people could choose what they wished to eat and drink.
People had their health care needs met by various health care professionals. We saw people could see a GP when they needed to, and health conditions were monitored.
People felt cared for and told us staff were kind. Our observations were that staff knew people living at Israel Sieff Court well and there were friendly interactions between people and staff. A relative told us that they couldn’t find anywhere better.
Care plans captured peoples support needs and we saw people and their families had been able to contribute to the plans. Peoples likes, dislikes, preferences and choices were recorded, and care plans were reviewed to ensure they remained accurate.
People were able to join in activities in and away from the home. While people enjoyed the activities, there were periods of time of when people were unsupported and lacked stimulation. We made a recommendation for this to be reviewed.
People were supported to remain at the home at the end of their life. Decisions made in respect of end of life care were clearly recorded and staff were aware of peoples wishes.
People and staff felt supported by the registered and deputy manager. Staff received regular supervision and the opportunity to attend staff meetings. People told us they knew who the registered manager and deputy manager was and told us they were always “Popping in."
The registered and deputy manager completed audits to monitor and improve the service. Further audits were completed by the district manager to ensure the service was compliant.