Archived: Durham Care Home

Updated 7 July 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 registered 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 13 May 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

The local authority safeguarding and quality teams and the local NHS were contacted as part of the inspection, to ask them for their views on the service and whether they had any on-going concerns. We also looked at the information we hold about the registered provider.

During the inspection we used the Short Observational Framework Tool for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI allows us to spend time observing what is happening in the service and helps us to record how people spend their time and if they have positive experiences. We observed staff interacting with people who used the service and the level of support they provided to people throughout the day, including meal times.

We spoke with eight people who used the service, three care staff, the deputy manager, the cook and the registered manager.

We looked at four care files which belonged to people who used the service. We also looked at other important documentation relating to people who used the service such as incident and accident records and 12 medication administration records (MARs). We looked at how the service used the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty code of practice to ensure that when people were deprived of their liberty or assessed as lacking capacity to make their own decisions, actions were taken in line with the legislation.

We looked at a selection of documentation relating to the management and running of the service. These included three staff recruitment files, training record, staff rotas, supervision records for staff, minutes of meetings with staff and people who used the service, safeguarding records, quality assurance audits, maintenance of equipment records, cleaning schedules and menus. We also undertook a tour of the building.

Updated 7 July 2016

Durham care home is registered to provide care and accommodation for 20 older people some of whom may have dementia. The home has good public transport links to the city centre and is close to local facilities and amenities.

The last inspection of the service was completed in July 2013 and was complaint with all of the regulations we inspected at that time.

The service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 who used the service were protected from abuse and avoidable harm by staff who had been trained to recognise the signs of potential abuse and knew what actions to take if they suspected abuse had occurred. Staff who had been recruited safely were deployed in suitable numbers to meet the assessed needs of the people who used the service. People’s medicines were stored safely and administered as prescribed.

People were supported by staff who had been trained to carry out their roles effectively; they had the skills and abilities to communicate with the people who used the service. Consent was gained before care and support was delivered and the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed within the service. People were supported to eat a balanced diet of their choosing. When concerns were identified relevant professionals were contacted for their advice and guidance.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew their preferences for how care and support should be delivered. We observed staff supporting people with kindness and compassions during our inspection. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff who understood the need to treat sensitive information confidentially.

People were involved with the initial and on-going planning of their care. Their levels of independence and individual strengths and abilities were recorded. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with important people in their lives and to follow their hobbies and interests. The registered provider had a complaints policy which was made available to people who used the service. When complaints were received they were used to develop the service possible as required.

People who used the service and staff told us the registered manager was approachable and supportive. A quality assurance system was in place to ensure shortfalls in care, treatment and support were identified. However, we saw that accidents and incidents were not collated to enable themes and trends to be identified. People who used the service or their appointed representatives were not asked for there views on the service and therefore could not be used to improve the service as required.