You are here

Archived: Capwell Grange Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

This unannounced inspection took place when we visited the service on 9 and 11 November 2016. It was completed on 23 November 2016 when we had received feedback from all members of the inspection team.

The service provides care and nursing support to people with a variety of needs including those living with dementia, physical disabilities, mental health needs and chronic health conditions. On the day of our inspection, there were 142 people being supported by the service.

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.

Potential risks to people’s health, safety and welfare had been reduced because there were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how to support people safely. There were systems in place to safeguard people from avoidable harm and staff had been trained in safeguarding procedures. The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient staff to support people safely. People’s medicines were managed safely.

Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs. They understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care and support being provided. The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the related Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were being met.

People were supported by staff who were kind, caring, friendly and respectful. They were supported to make choices about how they lived their lives and how they wanted to be supported. People had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were supported to access other health services when required.

People’s needs had been assessed and they had care plans that took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. Where possible, people and their relatives had been involved in reviewing people’s care plans. People had been provided with a variety of activities facilitated by activities coordinators on each unit.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, external professionals and staff, and they acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service.

The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements. The manager provided stable leadership and effective support to staff, and promoted a caring and inclusive culture within the service. Staff were motivated to do their best to provide good care to people who used the service and to work in collaboration with people’s relatives.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

The service was safe.

People felt safe and there were effective systems in place to safeguard them.

The provider had robust recruitment procedures in place. There was enough skilled and experienced staff to support people safely.

People�s medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate training and support in order to develop skills and knowledge necessary for them to support people effectively.

Staff understood people�s individual needs and provided the support they needed.

People had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They had access to health professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

The service was caring.

Staff were kind and caring towards people they supported.

People were supported in a way that protected their privacy and dignity. As much as possible, they were also supported to maintain their independent living skills.

People�s choices had been taken into account when planning their care and they had been given information about the service to help them to make informed choices and decisions.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

The service was responsive.

People�s care plans were person centred and took into account their individual needs, preferences and choices.

Staff worked in partnership with people and their relatives so that people�s needs were appropriately met.

The provider had an effective complaints system and people felt able to raise concerns.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 January 2017

The service was well-led.

The manager provided stable leadership and effective support to staff in order to promote a caring and inclusive culture within the service.

People and their relatives were enabled to routinely share their experiences of the service.

The provider�s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements.