Archived: Godswell Park

Updated 10 April 2015

We inspected Godswell Park on 29 July 2014. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

We spoke with 10 people, five relatives, 12 members of staff and the registered manager. We looked at 10 people’s care records, medicine and administration records for people and a range of records relating to the management of the home.

Before the visit we looked at previous inspection reports and notifications we had received. Services tell us about important events relating to the care they provide using a notification. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern.

Before our inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the home and contacted the commissioners of the service to obtain their views. We also looked at the 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.

This report was written during the testing phase of our new approach to regulating adult social care services. After this testing phase, inspection of consent to care and treatment, restraint, and practice under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was moved from the key question ‘Is the service safe?’ to ‘Is the service effective?

The ratings for this location were awarded in October 2014. They can be directly compared with any other service we have rated since then, including in relation to consent, restraint, and the MCA under the ‘Effective’ section. Our written findings in relation to these topics, however, can be read in the ‘Is the service safe’ sections of this report.

Updated 10 April 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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service. This was an unannounced inspection which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

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.

Godswell Park is located in the town of Bloxham, near Banbury in Oxfordshire. The nursing home is registered to accommodate up to 45 people. The home provides nursing care for older people. On the day of our inspection 45 people were living at the service.

The service had met all of the outcomes we inspected against at our last inspection on 13 February 2014.

During this inspection we found people’s medicines were not always managed appropriately. People could not be assured they had received their medicines as prescribed as staff had not always kept an accurate record of medicines. Medicines were not always stored at the manufacturers recommended temperatures. The registered manager has since told us they have taken action to rectify these issues.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe. One person said “Staff are very observant to see anything that might go wrong”, The provider had effective procedures for ensuring that any concerns about people’s safety were appropriately reported.

Staff working at Godswell Park understood the needs of the people in their care and we saw support was provided with kindness and compassion. People told us they felt well cared for and valued the relationships they had with nurses and care workers. Comments included; “Am I looked after? Definitely. It’s a lovely place.” “I can’t fault it.” “The nurses are great. The carer’s are wonderful.” “It’s too good. We are very spoilt.” “The carers are so kind.”

The service ensured staff had the necessary skills to support people through, induction training, ongoing training and regular supervision. Staff told us they understood their roles and responsibilities and received the support they needed. A Nurse told us, “This is an incredibly supportive organisation.”

People were involved in the planning of their care and staff provided support that met their needs and maintained their independence. People had their needs assessed prior to any care being given, reducing the risk of inappropriate care. Care plans were made from these assessments and where risks or issues were identified, referrals were made and specialist advice sought. One person said “I want to stay independent, do things for myself.” Nurses and care staff were recruited appropriately and we saw there were sufficient staff on duty to provided people with appropriate support.

People told us they were consistently treated with dignity and respect. We observed staff treating people with dignity and respect using the person’s preferred name. People told us they could choose either male or female care workers to support them.

People told us the meals were very good. People could choose from an extensive menu or the chef would prepare a meal that the person wanted. People who needed support with eating and drinking were supported appropriately.

At the time of our visit no one was subject to a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) application. This is where a person can be lawfully deprived of their liberties where it is deemed to be in their best interests or their own safety. The registered manager, care and nursing staff had knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and we saw evidence staff acted in accordance with the legal requirements.

People knew how to raise a complaint and told us they felt confident they would be listened too. One person said, “if you want to complain you can go right to the top, it’s encouraged.” All the complaints we saw had been resolved in line with the provider’s complaints policy.

The registered manager and directors were visible and seen to be interacting with people throughout the home and speaking to people by their preferred names. People clearly knew them and spoke with them openly in a familiar fashion. The managers and directors offices were grouped together in a central area of the building. Doors to these offices were open all day and we saw people stopping as they passed to chat or just say hello. People told us this was normal practice. This helped to create a positive and open culture.

The registered manager assessed and monitored the quality of care consistently. Regular audits were conducted and learning was shared with nurses and care staff. The provider encouraged feedback from people, relatives and staff, which they used to make improvements to the service.