Archived: St Mary's Nursing Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, speaking with the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare. Records were in place to monitor any specific areas where people were more at risk and explained what action staff needed to take to protect them.

We saw people using the service were treated with respect and dignity by the staff who supported them. Care and support was delivered in a safe way by staff who had received appropriate training.

The home was clean and fresh throughout. We saw there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

There were systems in place to make sure people received their medications safely and we saw staff had completed training in this subject.

We saw robust background checks had been carried out on staff before they started to work at the home to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed on a regular basis. We saw people who used the service and their relatives had been involved in writing plans of care and these were reviewed and updated regularly.

Is the service caring?

People said they were supported by kind, caring and friendly staff who were aware of their needs and preferences. We saw staff interacting with people positively. They encouraged them to be as independent as they were able to be, while providing support as needed. People who used the service and the visitors we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support provided.

We saw people looked well-presented and cared for. We spoke with five people who used the service and four visitors. They said they were happy with the care provided and complimented the staff for the way they supported people. One person told us, 'I am happy with how I am looked after, they do their best.' A visitor said, 'I pop in at different times and everything is always pretty good. The food is great, they take time to present pureed meals nicely so it looks appetising and it tastes very good.'

Care files contained detailed information about people's needs and preferences. Staff were aware of the content of the files and followed the guidance outlined.

Is the service responsive?

Care records demonstrated that when there had been changes in people's needs outside agencies had been involved to make sure they received the correct care and support. For example we saw assessments had been completed to make sure people were eating and drinking enough. We saw where people needed additional support timely referrals had been made to the GP or other healthcare professionals.

We saw the complaints procedure was displayed in the home along with a poster encouraging people to discuss any concerns with the manager. People who used and visited the service told us they knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. People we spoke with said if they had raised minor issues with staff these had been addressed promptly.

Is the service well-led?

At the time of the inspection there was no registered manager. However, an acting manager was in post and we know they have submitted an application to the commission to become the registered manager at the home.

Satisfaction surveys and meetings had been used to enable people to share their views on the service provided. This helped the provider to assess if people were receiving the care and support they needed. People's comments indicated they were happy with how staff supported them and the home's facilities.

We saw there was a system in place to assess how the home was operating and address any shortfalls. Where action plans were in place progress was being made to address these.

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. We saw staff had access to policies and procedure to inform and guide them. Staff training and development needs had been assessed to enable the provider to arrange future training sessions.

Evidence showed before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

We found people experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs or protected their rights. People's care and treatment was being planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans.

We found people were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration. People we spoke with told us the food was good and on the whole they could make choices.

People's health, safety and welfare was protected when more than one provider was involved in their care and treatment, or when they moved between different services. This was because the provider worked in co-operation with others.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. During our inspection we found staff were able to meet people's needs in a timely way.

There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.