Background to this inspection
Updated
7 June 2016
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.
The inspection took place on 16 and 17 February 2016 and was unannounced.
The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert-by-experience had experience of supporting a relative using adult social care services.
Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service including notifications the provider sent us. A notification is information about important events that happen in the service which the provider is required to send us by law. For example, serious injuries or allegations of abuse. We spoke with the local authority care commissioners’ team and Healthwatch Derbyshire, who are an independent organisation that represents people using health and social care services. No concerns were raised by them about the care and support people received.
We asked the service to complete a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give us information about the service, what they do well, and what improvements they are planning to make. This was returned to us by the provider.
During the inspection we spoke with four people who used the service and three relatives. We spoke with four care staff, one of the catering staff, the registered manager and the area manager for the provider. We also received the views of two visiting healthcare professionals. Not all of the people living at the service were able to fully express their views about their care. We spent time observing how people were supported by staff in a range of activities during the two days of our visit. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We looked at a range of records related to how the service was managed. This included five people’s care records, two staff recruitment and training files, some of the provider’s policies, procedures relating to people’s care and safety and the service and their recorded checks of the quality and safety of people’s care.
Updated
7 June 2016
The inspection visit took place on 16 and 17 February 2016 and the first day was unannounced.
The home is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. The service does not provide nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were 26 people living there.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection, and they were present on the two visits we undertook. 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.
Medicines were not always managed safely. People were satisfied that they received their medicines as prescribed.
People were protected from the risk of harm or abuse. Staff understood how to recognise and respond to concerns. Risks associated with people’s care needs were assessed and measures put in place to reduce the likelihood of harm occurring.
There were enough staff to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs, and supported people to access healthcare services promptly. People told us staff cared for them in a kind and compassionate way. People were treated in a manner which was dignified and upheld their rights.
The provider had procedures and checks in place to ensure that staff were of good character and fit to work in a care environment. Staff had an induction period at the start of their employment and received ongoing training.
The provider met the principles and legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
People were supported to maintain a balanced diet, and they told us they enjoyed the variety of meals and snacks offered.
People felt that the care and activities offered were responsive to their needs. People were supported to maintain relationships which were important to them, and staff knew people’s individual preferences well.
People were involved in planning and reviewing their care, and felt able to raise concerns or make a complaint. The provider sought people’s views about their care and took action to improve the service in response to this.
The provider had systems in place to monitor and review care, but this did not always identify when people’s care had not been reviewed recently. The provider’s policies and procedures did not always reflect current professional guidance.
People, relatives and staff felt supported to make suggestions to improve care or raise concerns.