You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

We inspected the service on 23 November 2018. The inspection was unannounced. Froome Bank is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service accommodates up to eight people.

On the day of our inspection eighteen people were living at the home.

People continued to benefit from living in a home where staff understood the risks to their safety and where they were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse. Staff supported people to stay as safe as possible as their needs and their safety needs changed. People were supported to have the equipment they needed to remain safe, and staff encouraged people to use this. Safe staff recruitment processes were used, to further reduce risks to people and there were enough staff to meet people’s care and safety needs. People did not have to wait long if they needed any assistance from staff, and people were confident staff would help them when they wanted.

There were systems in place to support people to have the medicines they needed to remain safe and well. Senior staff regularly checked people were administered their medicines safely. Staff were not allowed to administer people’s medicines until they had received the training they needed, and their competency had been checked. The registered manager and provider had put systems in place to review any untoward incidents, take any learning from these and reduce risk to people further.

People continued to receive an effective service and people were supported by staff who had received training and developed the skills needed to assist people. Staff assessed people’s needs and used this information to help people to settle into the home quickly. People made their own decisions about what they wanted to eat and drink. Where people needed additional support to have enough to eat and drink to remain well, this was discreetly provided by staff. People were confident if they needed any health care from other organisations staff would arrange this. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People liked the staff who cared for them and told us the staff were kind. People were treated with respect, and their rights to independence and privacy were acted on by staff. Staff knew what was important to people and encouraged them to make their own decisions about their day to day care. Staff used different ways of communicating with people, based on their preferences, where people needed extra support to make some decisions. People were supported by staff who understood how they liked to be reassured, when this was needed.

People continued to receive a responsive service. People’s needs were reflected in the care plans developed with them and their relatives, which were regularly reviewed. Staff adjusted people’s care plans as their wishes and needs changed. Relatives were asked for their views on the care to be offered. People’s care plans reflected advice provided by external health and social care professionals.

Some people enjoyed the independence of spending their time doing things they enjoyed on their own, such as reading and chatting to other people who lived at Froome Bank. Other people liked support from staff to do interesting things, and have trips out. The registered manager planned to review people’s access to activities, so they could be assured people would continue to enjoy a breadth of fun things to do at the time right for them.

Systems were in place to support people to raise any concerns or make any complaints. None of the people or their relatives had wanted to make any complaints because t

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

The service remains good.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

The service remains good.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

The service remains good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

The service remains good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 January 2019

The service remains good.