Archived: Silverlea Residential Home

The inspection took place on 27 April 2015 and was an unannounced inspection. On the date of the inspection there were 18 people living in the home. The home is registered to provide care to 35 people in both single and double bedrooms, situated on four floors of the building.

A registered manager was in place. 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 and their relatives spoke positively about the care provided at the home, their feedback demonstrated a high level of satisfaction with the service. For example people said staff were caring and attentive and they felt safe in the home.

We found bedrooms were nicely decorated and documentation was in place showing that appropriate safety checks on equipment such as fire, gas and electrical was undertaken. However areas of the building required decoration and we found some risks associated with the premises and equipment were not effectively managed. Radiators were unguarded increasing the risk of burns and some carpets presented trip hazards.

This was a breach of Regulation 12 (d) and (e) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Risks to people’s health were appropriately assessed and plans of care put in place to keep people safe. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of risks posed to individuals and how to safeguard them from abuse.

People spoke positively about the food at the home. Arrangements were in place to ensure people were provided with sufficient quantities of suitably nutritious food and people’s weights were regularly monitored.

We found the home to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of DoLS and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and how to ensure the rights of people with limited mental capacity when making decisions was respected.

People’s healthcare needs were met. The service had strong links with health professionals and plans of care contained their advice and expertise to help ensure effective care.

People’s individual preferences were catered for. Care plans showed the service had assessed what was important to people and staff demonstrated a good knowledge of how to deliver care in line with people’s individual preferences.

We observed care and saw staff delivered care in line with the requirements of care plans. Feedback from people and their relatives was that staff were kind and considerate, and our observations confirmed this. People were treated well by staff displaying a high level of dignity and respect. Staff had taken the time to develop strong relationships with people who used the service.

Arrangements were in place to provide a range of activities to people and their involvement in these was regularly assessed. Social and spiritual needs were assessed and appropriate plans of care put in place.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the management at the home and said they were effective in dealing with any concerns or queries. A range of audits and checks were undertaken by the home and there was evidence the service was committed to continuous improvement to the quality of its service.

We found although the service had taken appropriate action to keep people safe, allegations of abuse had not always been reported to us in line with the services statutory duties. We also found two instances were key policies were not followed putting people at risk. Improvements were required to ensure compliance with these policies was achieved and compliance with these policies was regularly monitored.

You can see what action we asked the provider to take at the back of the report.