You are here

Archived: St Giles Nursing Home Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 22 June 2016

This inspection was carried out on 4 and 5 April 2016 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection since Avery Homes RH Ltd had taken over the home.

St Giles Nursing Home provides care and accommodation to up to 66 people in need of nursing care. People living at the home were there on either a long term basis or a temporary basis waiting to return home or move to other long term services. At the time of this inspection there were 47 people in the home.

There was no registered manager at the time of our inspection although an application had been received from the person managing the home on a day to day basis. 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.

Improvements were being made to the service to ensure that a good quality service was provided to people but this was a work in progress.

People felt safe with the staff but systems in place for managing risks associated with their needs did not always ensure they were protected.

People were consulted about the care they received and were involved in planning their care. However, the numbers and deployment of staff did not always ensure that people received care and support in the way that they wanted.

People received sufficient food and drink to remain healthy and choices were available but not everyone was happy with the quality and presentation of food.

Privacy, dignity and independence was generally promoted but some improvements could be made.

People received their medicines as prescribed and their health needs were met by the appropriate healthcare professionals.

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care because they received training, guidance and support.

Staff were kind and compassionate and had developed good relationships with people.

People were able to consent to the care they received where they had the capacity to do so. Where people did not have the capacity to make decision systems were in place to ensure that their human rights were protected.

People were supported to follow individual hobbies and interests and maintain links with friends and relatives.

People felt listened to and able to raise any concerns they may have.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 22 June 2016

The service was not consistently safe.

People felt safe with the staff and systems were in place to protect people from abuse.

Risks associated with people�s needs were not always managed safely.

The numbers and deployment of staff did not always ensure that people received safe and appropriate care.

People were supported to receive their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 June 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to provide effective care to people.

People�s rights were protected because staff understood the legal principles to ensure that people were not unlawfully restricted.

People received sufficient food and drink to remain healthy but not everyone was happy with the food they received.

People�s health needs were met by a variety of healthcare professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 June 2016

The service was not always caring.

People felt staff were kind, caring and compassionate but the service provided did not always support people to receive care in the way they wanted.

People�s privacy, dignity and independence was generally maintained but improvements could be made.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 22 June 2016

The service was not always responsive

People�s needs were not always met in a personalised way by staff.

People felt listened to and were confident that their concerns would be addressed.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 22 June 2016

The service was not consistently well led

There was no registered manager in post but an open and inclusive environment was being developed.

Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service but improvements were still needed to ensure a consistently good quality of service was provided.