• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Thamesfield Nursing Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Wargrave Road, Henley On Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 2LX (01491) 418100

Provided and run by:
Thamesfield Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

19 April 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 19 and 21 April 2016 and was unannounced. Thamesfield Nursing Home is a care home with nursing that provides a service to up to 12 older people. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people living in the home.

The service had a registered manager as required. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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. The registered manager was present and assisted us during this inspection.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents or allegations of abuse. They felt confident it would be addressed appropriately. There were robust recruitment processes in place. All necessary safety checks were completed to ensure prospective staff members were suitable before they were appointed to post.

People told us staff were available when they needed them and staff knew how they liked things done. The service ensured there were enough qualified and knowledgeable staff to meet people’s needs at all times. The provider had employed skilled staff and took steps to make sure the care was based on local and national guidance. Staff were knowledgeable and focused on following the best practice at the service making sure people received appropriate care and support.

People told us they were encouraged to do things for themselves and staff helped them to be independent when they could. Risk assessments were carried out to ensure people’s safety. Staff recognised and responded to changes in risks to people who use the service. People received effective personal care and support from staff who knew them well and were trained and supervised. There were contingency plans in place to respond to emergencies.

People received support that was individualised to their personal preferences and needs.

Their needs were monitored and care plans reviewed regularly or as changes occurred. People were given a nutritious and balanced diet and hot and cold drinks and snacks were available between meals. People had their healthcare needs identified and were able to access healthcare professionals such as their GP. Staff knew how to access specialist professional help when needed.

People's rights to make their own decisions, where possible, were protected and staff were aware of their responsibilities to ensure those rights were promoted. People were treated with care and kindness. The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The DoLS provide a lawful way to deprive someone of their liberty, provided it is in their own best interests or is necessary to keep them from harm. The managers and staff were knowledgeable about Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). At the time of our inspection no one was deprived of their liberty. Staff were following the principles of the MCA when supporting people to make a decision.

People received their prescribed medicine safely and on time. Storage, handling and records of medicine were accurate. People and relatives told us good things about the service they received. Our observations and the records we looked at confirmed the positive descriptions people and relatives had given us. Staff understood the needs of the people and we saw care was provided with kindness and compassion. People and their families told us they were happy with their care.

People were able to engage in meaningful activities or spend time with their visitors or by themselves. Their choices were always respected. People's wellbeing was protected and all interactions observed between staff and people living at the service were respectful and friendly. People confirmed staff respected their privacy and dignity. People benefitted from living at a service that had an open and friendly culture.

People felt staff were happy working at the service and had a good relationship with them, each other and the management. Staff told us the management was open with them and communicated what was happening at the service and with the people living there. People told us they felt the service was managed well and that they could approach management and staff with any concerns.

The registered manager assessed and monitored the quality of care consistently with the help of staff and other members of staff in the company. The home encouraged feedback from people and families, which they used to make improvements to the service.

Throughout our inspection we saw examples of appropriate support that helped make the service a place where people felt included and consulted. People and their families were involved in the planning of their care.

21 October 2013

During a routine inspection

At the time of the visit there were 11 people receiving care. We met with four people receiving care; two visitors and five staff.

People using the service were all complimentary about the quality of care they received saying that staff were "really respectful" and that "staff really look after you". Some people had moved into the nursing home from another, more independent part of the service.

Staff were described as "always jolly" and "helpful", and people appreciated the environment. Rooms were light; spacious and well equipped with televisions; telephones and adequate storage space. Some rooms had views overlooking the River Thames. Corridors; lounges and the dining rooms were spacious and furniture was arranged so that people could rest if necessary. Fresh flowers throughout further enhanced the environment.

People's needs were regularly reviewed and staff were trained to be able to effectively deliver care and support to people with differing needs.

People felt safe and staff felt supported. Staff were proud of their work and were motivated to maintain high standards.

People felt involved in their care and were able to make choices. There were a range of activities available if people wished to join in.

22 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who live at the home. People told us they were pleased with the care they received. One person told us the staff "run the pace well". During our visit the local GP carried out a weekly visit. The GP told us the manager "knows her residents well" and was doing "an amazing job".

Care plans were specific to the individual person and detailed their personal and social care needs. We saw people were involved in planning their care and people were offered choices in all aspects of their care.

We looked at staff training and found staff received training and the manger had a system to record training. Not all training was up to date but the manager told us arrangements were in place to ensure all staff would receive the necessary training.

People we spoke with were aware of how to complain and who to complain to. None of the people we spoke with had any complaints at the time of our visit.

14 December 2011

During a routine inspection

The people who use this service preferred to be referred to as residents. This preference is respected within this report.

Residents we spoke with felt they were involved in making decisions about their care and what they did on a day to day basis. They felt the staff always respected their privacy and dignity and that the staff helped them to remain as independent as possible.

Residents we spoke with told us that they felt their needs were being met and that they felt their care was delivered in the way they preferred. Residents felt that staff were available when they needed them and that the staff all had the skills they needed when providing their care and treatment. They told us they felt safe living at the home and that they would tell the manager or another staff member if they had any concerns.

Residents we spoke with felt that their views were actively sought by the home and that their opinions were listened to and taken into account by the management and staff.