Archived: Meresbeck

Updated 22 March 2017

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 02 March 2017 and was an unannounced inspection. The inspection was carried out by an adult social care inspector.

Prior to the inspection taking place, information from a variety of sources was gathered and analysed. This included notifications submitted by the provider relating to incidents, accidents, health and safety and safeguarding concerns which affect the health and wellbeing of people.

We contacted the local authority commissioning team, safeguarding team and Lancashire Fire and Rescue as part of our planning process. We did this to see if they had any relevant information regarding the registered provider. We received no information of concern.

During the inspection visit we spoke with six people who lived at the home and one visitor who was at the home on the day of the inspection visit. Following the inspection visit we spoke with three relatives by telephone. We did this to obtain their views about the quality of the service provided.

Information was gathered from a variety of sources throughout the inspection process. We spoke with four members of staff. This included the registered manager, the cook and two members of staff who provided direct care.

We looked at a variety of records. This included care plan files related to three people who lived at the home and recruitment files belonging to three staff members. We viewed other documentation which was relevant to the management of the service including health and safety certification and training records.

As part of the inspection visit we walked around the home to check the living environment met the needs of people who lived at the home. We also spent time in the communal areas. This allowed us to observe the interactions between people who lived at the home and staff.

Updated 22 March 2017

This unannounced inspection took place on 02 March 2017.

Meresbeck is a care home managed by SKR Limited. It is located in the small town of Carnforth, north of Lancaster. The home is registered to provide care and support up to a maximum of twenty people. At the time of the inspection visit there were fifteen people residing at the home.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.

We last carried out a comprehensive inspection of the service 18 and 19 November 2015. At this inspection we rated the service as requires improvement as we identified several concerns. The registered manager had failed to have appropriate systems to lawfully deprive a person of their liberty. Processes were not in place to ensure CQC was notified of all significant events. We also made a recommendation that improvements were made to the living environment to ensure it was safe and suitable for people. We carried out a focussed inspection 18 May 2016 to ensure all improvements had been made. We found the service had made all the required improvements.

At this inspection carried out in March 2017, people and relatives spoke positively about the care delivered. We observed staff being patient and spending time with people who lived at the home. People who lived at the home looked comfortable and happy in the presence of staff.

Arrangements were in place for managing and administering medicines. However, systems did not always reflect good practice guidelines. We have made a recommendation about this.

People told us staffing levels met their needs. We observed call bell waiting times and noted these were answered in a timely manner. Staff told us they had time to build quality relationships with people who lived at the home.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. People who lived at the home and relatives all commended the caring nature of the staff team.

People told us they felt safe and secure. Arrangements were in place to protect people from risk of abuse. Staff had knowledge of safeguarding procedures and were aware of their responsibilities for reporting any concerns.

Recruitment procedures ensured the suitability of staff before they were employed. Staff told us they were unable to start their employment without all the necessary checks being in place.

People’s healthcare needs were monitored and managed appropriately by the service. People told us guidance was sought in a timely manner from health professionals when appropriate.

Care plans were in place for people who lived at the home. Care plans covered support needs and personal wishes. People who lived at the home and relatives said they were involved in the care planning process. Plans were reviewed and updated at regular intervals and information was sought from appropriate professionals as and when required.

Feedback on the quality of food provided was positive. People were happy with the variety, quality and choice of meals available to them. People’s nutritional needs were addressed and monitored.

Social activities were offered to people who lived at the home. We saw a variety of outside agencies visited the home to provide entertainment.

We saw improvements had been made to the living conditions at the home. The registered manager told us the refurbishment programme was ongoing. Certificates viewed showed us premises and equipment were appropriately maintained.

The registered manager had a training and development plan for all staff. Staff told us they were provided with relevant training to enable them to carry out their role.

Systems were in place to ensure people who were deprived of their liberty were done so lawfully.

The registered manager held regular meetings with people who lived at the home to receive feedback on the service being provided. We saw evidence changes were made following people’s suggestions.

The registered manager had a range of assurance systems to monitor quality and effectiveness of the service provided. They fed back to the nominated individual any concerns so improvements could be made.

People who lived at the home, relatives and staff all provided positive feedback about the registered manager’s skills and personal attributes. They said the registered manager ensured high quality care was provided.

Staff were positive about ways in which the service was managed. Staff described teamwork as good and said there was regular communication between senior management and staff.