Archived: Newbridge Towers

Updated 22 December 2016

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.

This inspection took place on 18 and 21 November 2016 and was unannounced and was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection, we looked at all the information we had about the service. This information included the statutory notifications that the provider had sent to CQC. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

Before our inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with 13 people who were living in the home, and two visitors .Staff we spoke with included the acting manager, two senior staff and five care staff, domestic and catering staff. We observed how staff interacted with the people they supported in all parts of the home.

We viewed the care records of three people, staff training records, staff recruitment files, supervision records and staff duty rotas. We also checked a number of other records relating to the way the home was run.

Updated 22 December 2016

The inspection took place on 18 and 21 November 2016 and was unannounced. The service was last inspected in May 2015.

After our last comprehensive inspection in May 2015, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breaches of regulation found. These were in the following areas; the home was not suitably clean and there were unsafe recruitment procedures in place. There were failings in relation to DoLS applications not being made for people when needed .There were also shortfalls in how the service was run. In particular, statutory notifications had not been made to the Commission for incidents that we need to be notified about.

Newbridge Towers is registered to provide personal care for up to 20 people. On the days of our visit, there were 20 people at the home.

The new provider of the service had submitted an application to be registered with us. We rejected this application, as it was incomplete. It is a legal condition that a provider carrying out a regulated activity and running a care home is registered with us.

There was no registered manager for the service. The acting manager’s application to be registered with the Care Quality Commission had been returned as it was incomplete.The acting manager had not kept written interview notes for three interviews carried out for prospective new staff .This meant there was a risk that unsuitable staff could be recruited if there was insufficient information to refer to when making a decision about their employment. .

There was enough staff that were suitably qualified on duty at all times to meet the needs of people at the home. Staff were trained and competent to know how to minimise risks to people from abuse and there were systems in place to keep people safe from harm.

Staff were very caring in their manner towards the people who assisted them with their needs. One person said, “They are all lovely girls”. Staff were very polite and demonstrated that they were respectful in manner to the people they supported.

People were able to consume a varied diet that supported them to be healthy and to make choices about what they ate and drank. The menus included likes and preferences of people who lived at the home. People spoke highly of the food that they were served. One person said, “The food is lovely and you can have what you ever you want they really don’t mind at all.”

The provider had a system in place so that the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were implemented when needed. This legislation protects the rights of people who lack capacity to make informed decisions in relation to different areas in their daily lives.

People were able to take part in a variety of individual social activities as well as group ones that they told us they really enjoyed. People told us that entertainers performed at the home regularly and they went out for trips into the local area if they wanted to on a daily basis.

Care plans were informative and helped to guide staff so that they understood what actions to take to meet people’s range of care needs. Staff were familiar with the content of each person’s care records. They knew how to provide care that was flexible to each individual and met their needs. Care plans were produced with the involvement of the person concerned. The care plans had been reviewed and updated regularly, this was to make sure they reflected the current needs of people.

People were supported with their physical health care needs and the staff consulted with external healthcare professionals to get specialist advice and guidance when needed.

Staff felt they were well supported in their work by the acting manager. People who lived at the home and the staff said they felt they could see the acting manager any time that they wished to talk to them.

Staff had an understanding what the provider’s values and aims were for the service. They knew the key value was to treat each person as if they were still living in their own home and as unique individuals. Audits demonstrated that regular checks were carried out on the safety and quality of the service. The system had identified that the provider’s interview forms had not been used at recent interviews.