Background to this inspection
Updated
3 September 2015
‘We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.’
The inspection took place on the 9 July 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by two inspectors. Before the inspection we reviewed the information we already held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law. We carried out observations throughout the day and including lunch and medicine rounds.
We spoke with nine staff including, senior staff, ancillary staff, care staff, nurses and activity staff. We spoke with three relatives, twelve people using the service and observations of those who could not comment about the service. We looked at four care plans, staff personal files, audits and other records relating to the management of the business.
Updated
3 September 2015
This inspection took place on the 9 July 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection on the 8 August 2014 this service was meeting all the required legislation.
The home provides accommodation and nursing care for up to fifty one people some whom are living with a dementia. The home always has a qualified nurse on duty and has 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.’
During the inspection we observed care provided around the needs of individuals and at a pace that suited them. Staff were relaxed and friendly.
We found a number of errors with medicines so could not be assured if was always administered safely or when people needed it.
Staffing levels were appropriate on the day of inspection. The manager documented and reviewed people’s dependency levels. Additional staff were not deployed at the busiest times of day which might help staff feel less pressurised.
Staff knew people really well which mitigated some of the risks of receiving poor care. However, gaps in record keeping meant we could not always see how staff were responding to changes in people’s needs.
There were robust recruitment processes in place to ensure people were supported by staff who had the right credentials.
Staff were supported appropriately to enable them to be effective in their job roles. Staff supervision was not happening as often as the manager had planned but staff said they felt well supported.
Staff supported people lawfully with decisions around their care and welfare.
People were supported to eat and drink although we could not always see if people drank enough for their needs as this was not clearly documented. However during our inspection we saw staff worked hard to promote people’s food and fluid intake.
People’s health care needs were closely monitored and met by suitably qualified staff or other health care professionals.
The service delivered good care and staff were responsive and patient. People received dignified care which enhanced their physical and emotional well-being. Staff promoted people’s independence and dignity.
People were involved in decisions about how the home was run and about their care and welfare.
People had suitable activities they could participate in and people were sufficiently stimulated.
People’s needs were assessed and reviewed. Plans of care were in place to help staff know what people’s needs were, but in reality staff knew people very well.
The service was well led. The manager was approachable and aware of what was happening within their service. They regularly monitored the service and there was differing levels of audits used to determine service compliance.
The manager engaged with people and their relatives about the service provided and we saw that people’s levels of satisfaction were high.
Staff were supported in their roles but this was an area for potential improvement.
The staff worked closely with other social and health care professionals for the common good of people using the service.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we have told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.