You are here

Archived: Clarendon Manor Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 11 February 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on the 11 February 2015 and was unannounced.

Clarendon Manor is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 36 older people. On the day of our visit there were 26 people living at the home.

A registered manager was 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.

People told us they felt safe living at Clarendon Manor and staff understood their responsibilities around keeping people safe. There were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. These included a procedure to manage identified risks to people’s care and an effective procedure for managing people’s medicines. There were enough suitably trained and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received training in areas considered essential to meet people’s needs safely and consistently.

Staff understood about consent and where people had capacity to make decisions, staff respected decisions people had made. The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), but we found capacity assessments and best interest decisions had not been consistently implemented in the home.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, DoLS, ensures people’s freedoms and liberties are not unlawfully restricted. The registered manager understood their legal obligations in regard of DoLS. They were in the process of making applications to the local authority to make sure people who lacked capacity continued to live their lives safely and in the least restrictive way.

Staff were respectful and friendly in their approach to people. There was a consistent staff team that enabled people to build relationships and friendships with staff. People were given choices about how they wanted to spend their day so they were able to retain some independence in their everyday life. Family and friends were able to visit when they wished and there were a range of things for people to do during the day to provide stimulation and promote wellbeing. Staff understood people’s healthcare needs and people were supported by external healthcare professionals to ensure their needs were fully met.

People who lived at the home, relatives and care staff said the home was well managed. There was an experienced management team in place and staff felt supported by the registered manager and senior staff. Staff told us they were listened to and would not hesitate to raise any concerns with the manager.

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. This was through feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, staff meetings and a programme of checks and audits.

Inspection carried out on 21 October 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection visit to Clarendon Manor we spoke with seven people who used the service about the care and support that they received. We also spoke with relatives of two people, a GP, a visiting professional, the manager and four staff. Without exception people were happy with the care and staff who provided the care. We saw that people who used the service were relaxed in the presence of staff and they told us that if they had any concerns or needed anything, they could talk to staff or the manager. Comments included, “They are very good, if I want anything I just ask and get it”, “I couldn’t ask for better care” and “I know my relative is safe here.”

We found that assessments and care plans were in place which identified the care that people who used the service needed. Where able, people had signed to confirm consent to their care plan. Our discussions with seven people who used the service confirmed that staff respected their wishes in relation to consent. We saw that care plans for one person with dementia took account of their right to refuse care at a particular time.

Recruitment checks were sufficiently robust to guard against employing unsuitable staff. We found that Clarendon Manor was well managed with systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of care which included management of medication. This meant that there was good oversight of the safety and welfare of people who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 6 November 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with seven people who lived at the home and four visitors during our visit. We were told, "The care is very good here" and "It is quite relaxed. I know my relative is in safe hands." We also spoke with the manager as well as three members of the care staff team about their role in supporting and caring for people.

We observed care staff supporting people with their daily routines and saw that people were treated with dignity and respect. We saw staff knocking on people's bedroom doors before being invited to enter and explaining what they were doing when medicines were given out. We saw staff calling people by their preferred names or titles. A visitor commented, "The staff are polite and respectful, but just as importantly they have good humour and banter."

We looked at records which stated how people liked and needed to be cared for. The care staff we spoke with demonstrated an understanding of people's needs and told us that care records were reviewed on a regular basis to make sure they remained relevant to people's changing needs. People told us, "The staff know my little ways."

We looked at training records and talked to care staff about the training they had received to enable them to meet people's needs. We were told, "The training is useful and helps us do our jobs better." A visitor commented, "There are training certificates displayed in the lobby, which allows us to see what they have done."

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)