You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 11 March 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service: Copper Beeches is a care home. It does not provide nursing care. It can accommodate up to 36 people, some of whom could be using the homes ‘short stay’ or ‘interim’ beds. These were beds used to facilitate an early discharge from hospital whilst a package of care, or equipment, was being organised to enable the person to return to their own home. At the time of our inspection, there were 24 people using the service which is located in a residential area, close to the centre of Andover.

People’s experience of using this service: Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had mostly been appropriately assessed and planned for.

Planned staffing levels were usually met and overall people were having their needs met in a safe and responsive manner. The registered manager provided assurances that the numbers of staff deployed would continue to be kept under review to ensure that the deployment of staff facilitated people’s safety and preferences at all times.

Overall the management of medicines was safe although there were some areas where best practice frameworks needed to be further embedded.

Most of the home was visibly clean although we did note some areas where the infection prevention and control measures could be improved.

Accidents and incidents were documented and investigated. They were reviewed monthly for trends and patterns so that remedial actions could be undertaken.

Appropriate policies and procedures were in place which ensured staff had clear guidance about what they must do if they suspected abuse was taking place.

People's capacity to consent to their care had been appropriately assessed.

Overall assessments of people’s needs were suitably detailed and holistic.

Staff were using evidence based guidance to enhance the care provided and to achieve positive outcomes for people.

Staff had received an induction, ongoing training and supervision which helped them to perform their role effectively.

There was a clear focus on the importance of good nutrition.

Overall the design and layout of the home was homely and appropriate for people’s needs.

Where necessary a range of healthcare professionals including GP’s, district nurses, community mental health nurses, chiropodists and occupational therapists had been involved in supporting people to maintain good health.

People continued to be treated with kindness, respect and dignity and had developed strong relationships with people. Staff understood the importance of supporting people to maintain their independence.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and care plans informed staff how they should support people in a way that met their likes, dislikes and preferences and of the things that were important to them.

People were supported to take part in a range of activities which supported them to lead a full and more active life.

There were systems in place to ensure complaints were investigated and responded to.

People's end of life wishes were recorded and staff had training in end of life care, which assured us people's wishes would be respected in their final days and following their death.

The registered manager managed the service well and had nurtured a positive person-centred culture within the home. They knew people well and displayed a commitment to putting person-centred care first and of trying new ways of meeting people’s needs and to improve their quality of life.

There was a clear leadership and management structure in place which helped to ensure that the service could deliver effective care and that staff at all levels were clear about their role and responsibilities.

A range of audits were being undertaken to monitor the effectiveness of aspects of the service including care documentation, infection control and medicines management. Along with other quality assurance systems, these measures demonstrated that there was a culture of developing the service and seeking continuous improveme

Inspection carried out on 11 October 2016

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 11 October 2016.

Copper Beeches Care Home is registered to provide care (without nursing) for up to 36 older people. The provider is a local authority. People are living with various types and degrees of dementia. There were 28 people resident on the day of the visit (including one person currently in hospital). The building offers accommodation over two floors, in four units and in 36 single rooms. The rooms were not en-suite but there were numerous bathing and toilet facilities throughout the building. The second floor is accessed via a staircase or a lift. The shared areas within the service were spacious and met the needs and wishes of people who live in the home.

The service has a registered manager running the service. 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, visitors to the service and staff were kept safe, whilst in the service. Risks were identified and managed to make sure that people and others were kept as safe as possible. Staff had completed training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and health and safety. They were fully committed to protecting people in their care and keeping them safe from all forms of harm or abuse.

People were provided with safe care which was supported by adequate numbers of appropriately trained and skilled staff being available at all times. The service’s recruitment procedure ensured that as far as possible, all staff employed were suitable and safe to work with vulnerable people. People were given their medicines in the right amounts at the right times by staff who had been trained to carry out this task.

The management team and staff protected people’s rights to make their own decisions and consent to their care. The staff team understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and consent issues which related to the people in their care. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 legislation provides a legal framework that sets out how to act to support people who do not have capacity to make a specific decision. The service made DoLS applications to the appropriate authorities, as necessary.

People were provided with kind and responsive care. Staff built strong and caring relationships with people, their families and friends. People were treated with dignity and respect at all times. People’s beliefs and lifestyle choices were identified and respected by a staff team that fully understood and were committed to giving people individualised care. The service gave compassionate end of life care.

People’s health, well- being and spiritual needs were met by staff who were properly trained and supported to do so. People were assisted to make sure they received health and well-being care from appropriate professionals. Staff were trained in specific areas so they could effectively meet people’s diverse and changing needs.

People benefitted from a well-managed service. The registered manager and management team were described as very approachable, open and responsive. People, staff and others were encouraged to express their views which were listened to and used as part of the quality assurance process. The service made sure they maintained and improved the quality of care provided.

Inspection carried out on 22 October 2013

During a routine inspection

We inspected against the regulated activity of accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. The provider is also registered to provide the regulated activity of treatment of disease, disorder or injury, however this was not being provided by the service.

We spoke with nine people who used the service and two relatives, the Registered Manager, Deputy Manager and six members of staff. We also met and spoke with the senior Service Manager who visited the home during the inspection.

All of the people we spoke with told us that the staff asked for their consent before giving care and support. Care and support was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. One person told us “The doctor comes quickly if you need one. You only have to mention you feel out of sorts and the staff keep an eye on you. I wouldn’t change anything about this home. I feel very safe”.

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment and there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet their needs. A person using the service told us “I don’t wait for staff, they come very quickly”. A member of staff said “We all get lots of training and lots of support from the managers”. We saw that people were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

Inspection carried out on 21 December 2012

During a routine inspection

In this report the name of a Registered Manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still Registered Manager on our register at the time of this inspection. We have advised the provider of what they need to do to remove the individual’s names from our register.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We used SOFI in this inspection because Copper Beeches provides a service for people with dementia and some of the people using the service were not able to provide direct feedback to us about their experiences.

People told us staff provided the care and support that they needed. During the visit we saw examples of good staff interactions with people who used the service, for example, responding to questions and supporting people to move to different areas of the home. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and communicated with people in different ways.

People who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. People said they were able to raise concerns with the staff or manager and were confident that action would be taken to address the issue.

Inspection carried out on 14 May 2012

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We used SOFI in this inspection because Copper Beeches provides a service for people with dementia and many of the people using the service were not able to provide direct feedback to us about their experiences.

During the observation we saw examples of good staff interactions with people who use the service, for example, asking people whether they wanted to join in with activities, responding to questions, supporting people to make choices about drinks and biscuits. We saw one example where a member of staff did not communicate effectively with a person using the service whilst they were providing care.

Inspection carried out on 28 October 2011

During a routine inspection

People using the service that we spoke with said they felt they were well treated by staff, received the care they needed and that staff had the right skills. One person said the home “couldn’t be better”.

People said they felt safe in the home and were confident that staff would respond appropriately to any concerns they raised.

People told us they thought there were sufficient staff available when they needed them.