You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 4 December 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Davlyn House provides accommodation and personal care for up to 29 people in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection there were 21 people living at the home.

We found the following examples of good practice.

• The visiting procedure in place had been shared with relatives. This included the booking system to be followed, health screening checks and the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to be worn by all visitors.

• When visits had been restricted other methods were used to ensure people maintained contact with their loved ones such as, video and telephone calls. A private social media account had been created where relatives were able to access updates and photos.

• The environment was well maintained and clean. Additional cleaning had been implemented to lower the risk of cross transmission.

• Zoning of areas within the home had been implemented and staff were assigned to work in specific areas to reduce the risk of cross infection.

• Staff were supported by the registered manager during periods of anxiety and staff had been signposted to wellbeing services.

• Other professionals such as the local authority and Infection Control Team had provided extra support when needed. The registered manager had also been supported by colleagues from the local Registered Manager’s Network Group.

Inspection carried out on 26 September 2018

During a routine inspection

Davlyn House is a residential care home registered to provide personal care for up to 29 people. People who use the service have physical health needs and some were living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 28 people using the service.

At our last inspection in February 2016 the service was rated as Good. At this inspection, the service had sustained its outstanding model of care and the registered manager had built on this to develop the service further achieving an outstanding rating in the key question, well-led. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and on going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns.

Staff delivered a high standard of care and knew people well. People were involved in their own care planning and were supported to make decisions independently. Staff were kind and compassionate and people who used the service felt valued. People received personalised care and were encouraged to maintain their hobbies and interests.

The registered manager was visible, accessible and acted as a role model for staff and the wider health and social care community. There was a tangible person centred culture in the home and staff were empowered to work innovatively, creatively and to focus on the needs of people. The registered manager had been nominated for a Dignity In Care Award and was successful in winning and had subsequently nominated the staff and the service for similar awards.

People continued to tell us they felt safe living at Davlyn House. The registered manager and staff knew how to protect people from harm and abuse. Risks to people continued to be assessed and managed by suitably trained staff. There was a safe recruitment process in place. People received their medicine on time and it was stored in a safe way. People were protected from the risk of the spread of infection.

The service was effective in meeting people’s needs. People had access to healthcare and were supported by other healthcare professionals in a timely way. People were provided with food and drink that met their nutritional needs and supported them to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

The service has had a recent extension and refurbishment and due consideration has been given to the design and decoration of the service to meet the needs of people living at Davlyn House.

The service provided activities and had good links to the wider community. The service had a complaints policy in place and people, relatives and staff had access to this.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection carried out on 18 February 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 18 February 2016 and was unannounced. This was the first time the service had been inspected since the current provider was in place.

The service was registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 20 people. People who used the service had physical health needs and/or were living with dementia. At the time of our inspection 18 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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 were treated with great kindness and compassion and they were very happy with the care they received. People were encouraged to make choices about their care and their privacy and dignity was respected by staff who had a passion to provide exceptional care.

People felt safe and staff knew how to protect people from avoidable harm and abuse. People’s risks were assessed and managed to help keep them safe and we saw that care was delivered in line with agreed plans.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. We saw that requests for support were responded to promptly by staff who had been checked to ensure they were suitable to work with the people who used the service. Medicines were safely managed, stored and administered to ensure that people got their medicines as prescribed.

Staff were suitably trained to meet people’s needs and were supported and supervised by the registered manager. Staff understood how to support people to make decisions and when they were unable to do this for themselves, support was provided in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People were provided with enough food and drink to maintain a healthy diet. People had choices about their food and drinks and there was flexibility to meet their preferences. People’s health was monitored and access to healthcare professionals was arranged when required.

People had support to meet their individual needs and preferences by staff who knew them well. Care plans were detailed and personal so that staff had the information they needed to be able to provide support to meet individual needs and requirements.

People knew how to complain and staff knew how to respond to complaints. A complaints procedure was in place although no formal complaints had been received.

The registered manager understood the conditions of registration with us. We saw that systems were in place to monitor quality and the registered manager analysed information and took actions to make improvements when required. There was a positive and homely atmosphere at the service and people felt the registered manager was approachable and responsive.