You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

This inspection took place on 12 and 13 April 2016 and was unannounced.

Sue Ryder St John's is a hospice that also provides specialist outpatient treatments and remote, telephone advice services. Fifteen beds are provided in the accommodation facilities at Sue Ryder St John's. At the time of our inspection four people were using the in-patient facilities.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as safe and independent as they could be.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their care and treatment needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the provider.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines, including controlled medicines, was suitable for the people who used the service.

Staff received a comprehensive induction process and on-going training. They were well supported by the registered manager, director and the provider and had regular one to one time for supervisions. Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when providing care and treatment for people.

Staff gained consent before supporting people or providing care and treatment. People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required. specialist diets were catered for.

People were supported to access a variety of additional health professional when required. Alternative therapy was available including; aromatherapy, Indian head and Swedish massages, reflexology, reiki and aromatherapy.

There was an extensive support programme, manned 24 hours to provide a single point of contact for additional support. The service had a Black, Minority and Ethnic (BME) outreach worker who worked closely with the wider community.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

A complaints procedure was in place and accessible to all. People knew how to complain.

Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

The service was safe.

Staff were knowledgeable about protecting people from harm and abuse.

There were enough trained staff to support people with their needs.

Staff had been recruited using a robust recruitment process.

Systems were in place for the safe management of medicines.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had attended a variety of training to keep their skills up to date and were supported with regular supervision.

People were involved in making decisions about all aspects of their treatment and care.

People could make choices about their food and drink and were provided with support when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

The service was caring.

People were able to make decisions about their daily activities.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People were treated with dignity and respect, and had the privacy they required.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

The service was responsive.

Care and support plans were personalised and reflected people’s individual requirements.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions regarding their care and support needs.

There was an extensive support programme, manned 24 hours.

The service had a black, minority and Ethnic (BME) outreach worker who worked closely with the wider community.

There was a complaints system in place and people were aware of this.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 October 2016

The service was well led.

People and their relatives knew the registered manager and were able to see him when required.

People and their relatives were asked for, and gave, feedback which was acted on.

Quality monitoring systems were in place and were effective.