We carried out a review of the data available to us about Pentlands Nursing Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Pentlands Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Pentlands Nursing Home 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. Pentlands Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 32 older people. The service provided care to 27 people at the time of the inspection. Pentlands Nursing Home is a large detached building with accommodation on two floors and a passenger lift to all the floors. All bedrooms are single and each has an suite bathroom or en suite toilet. There are also communal bathrooms on each floor. Each bedroom has a ceiling track hoist to people can be moved without the need for a mobile hoist. Communal lounge and a dining room are also provided. people have access to outside space in the garden.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Pentlands Nursing Home is a care home with nursing services and is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 32 older people. Pentlands Nursing Home is a large detached building with accommodation on two floors and a passenger lift to all the floors. The service provided care to 27 people at the time of the inspection.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
People’s views were sought as part of the service’s quality assurance process and changes were made following comments from people. There were a number of audits and checks on the safety and quality of the services provided. Whilst these were comprehensive we identified one area where this needed to be in more detail to ensure adequate checks on safety were maintained. We have made a recommendation about this.
People and their relatives said they felt the service was safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding procedures and had a good awareness of the importance of protecting people. Risks to people were assessed and action taken to mitigate these.
Medicines were safely managed. Sufficient numbers of staff were provided and checks were made on the suitability of new staff to work in a care setting. The service was clean and hygienic. Reviews of care and incidents took place often in conjunction with local primary medical teams so improvements could be made.
People’s health care needs were assessed and any medical needs followed up.
Staff were provided with a range of training including an induction for newly appointed staff and nationally recognised qualifications in care. Staff were encouraged and supported to enhance their skills and knowledge. The service had links with a local college which provided training.
People’s nutritional needs were met. Nutritious and varied meals were provided and people were able to choose their meals. Specialist diets were provided such as for people living with diabetes or those whose needs meant they were not able to chew or swallow food easily.
The premises were well maintained and adapted for those with mobility needs such as ramped areas for wheelchair users and track hoists in all bedrooms so people could be lifted without the need for a mobile hoist.
Where people did not have capacity to consent to their care and treatment this was assessed. Where these people had their liberty restricted an application for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been made to the local authority. 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’s right to privacy and independence were promoted. Staff treated people with kindness and as individuals. People and their families were consulted about their care although we noted this was not always clearly detailed in care plans.
People received responsive care. Each person’s needs were assessed and recorded along with care plans which were individualised to show how care needs should be met. Records were maintained on an electronic system which allowed staff to easily access and monitor people’s changing needs.
The complaints procedure was available and people reported that they were able to raise any concerns or issues which were resolved. Records of complaints and how they were dealt with were maintained. These showed a response was made to complainants along with an apology, if relevant, and as set out in the Duty of Candour regulation of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
Further information is in the detailed findings below
This inspection took place on 28 and 29 September 2015 and was unannounced. Pentlands Nursing Home is a care home with nursing services and is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 32 older people.
Pentlands Nursing Home is a large detached building with accommodation on two floors and a passenger lift to all the floors. The service currently provides a service to 32 people.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of 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 told us they felt safe at the service. Staff were confident about how to protect people from harm and what they would do if they had any safeguarding concerns. There were good systems in place to make sure that people were supported to take medicines safely and as prescribed. Risks to people had been assessed and plans put in place to keep risks to a minimum. There were enough staff on duty to make sure people’s needs were met. Recruitment procedures made sure staff had the required skills and were of suitable character and background. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and that there was good team work. Staff were supported through training, regular supervisions and team meetings to help them carry out their roles effectively. Staff were supported by an open and accessible management team.
The registered manager and staff were aware of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS are put in place to protect people where their freedom of movement is restricted. The registered manager had taken appropriate action and people were not restricted unnecessarily. Best interest meetings were held where people had limited capacity to make decisions for themselves.
People told us that staff were caring and that their privacy and dignity were respected. Care plans were person centred and showed that individual preferences were taken into account. Care plans gave clear directions to staff about the support people required to have their needs met. People were supported to maintain their health and had access to health services if needed. People’s needs were regularly reviewed and appropriate changes were made to their supportif required. People had opportunities to make comments about the service and how it could be improved.
There were effective management arrangements in place. The registered manager had a good oversight of the service and was aware of areas of practice that needed to be improved. There were systems in place to look at the quality of the service provided and action was taken where shortfalls were identified.
We spoke with three people living in the home. People told us that they experienced good quality care by people who were kind and respectful to them. We were told by people that ' you couldn't get better care at the Ritz' and that 'all of the staff were marvellous'. We were also told that there was a 'homely feel' and that they were very comfortable and well looked after.
We found that care was person centred, planned and delivered safely with regular reviews.
People told us that they felt safe in the home and we found that staff understood their roles and were committed to providing a high quality of care. People said that there were always enough staff available to meet their needs.
We found that the provider had effective systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service, which took into account the views of the people, relatives and staff. We saw that the provider used this feedback to make service improvements.
People told us that they are treated well and with respect. We were told that staff respect people's privacy by closing doors and curtains during care. A person living in the home said, "I'm treated with the greatest kindness and respect . . . I couldn't wish for better." Another person described staff members as "kind and friendly" and added, "they're very good to me."
People said that they had choice in how they spent their days and there were activities available for people. A person receiving respite care stated, "I'm treating it as a holiday . . . I'm having a good time!"
People said they felt safe living at the home and relatives stated that they felt their family members were safe there. One family member said, "I don't worry about about [my family member's] care." People said staff understood their needs and provided the support and care that was appropriate for them. People told us that staff were responsive when people asked for assistance. People told us they were supported with their medications.
People told us that they are asked about their care needs and that staff are responsive when people ask for assistance.
One person said of the service, 'I can't fault it,' and another person said, 'I couldn't wish for more.'
People said that they feel safe at the home and one person said, 'There are always staff around.'
One person said that there are enough staff on duty to meet their needs and another person said that this is the case 'most of the time,' but that the staff are 'sometimes stretched' when there is staff sickness.
People told us that they are supported with their medication.
People said that activities are provided, such as games and entertainment.
The home was said to be clean. One person said, there is regular cleaning and another person said that the home is 'spotless.'
People said that they are asked to give their views about the service by a questionnaire provided by the provider.