You are here

Archived: Digby Manor Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

This inspection took place on 9 August 2016 and was an unannounced comprehensive rating inspection. The location was last inspected in September 2015 and was rated ’Requires Improvement’.

Digby Manor is a registered care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 26 people. At the time of our inspection 24 people were living at the home.

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. The Registered Manager had been in post since May 2016.

People were safe and secure. Relatives believed their family members were kept safe. Risks to people had been assessed and managed appropriately.

Staff had been recruited appropriately and had received relevant training so that they were able to support people with their individual needs.

People safely received their medicines as prescribed to them.

Staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Staff understood when the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) should be followed.

People had a variety of food, drinks and snacks available throughout the day. They were able to choose the meals that they preferred to eat and meal times were flexible to meet people’s needs.

People were supported to stay healthy and had access to health care professionals as required. They were treated with kindness and compassion and there was positive communication and interaction between staff and the people living at the location.

People’s rights to privacy were upheld by staff that treated them with dignity and respect. People’s choices and independence were respected and promoted. Staff responded appropriately to people’s support needs.

People received care from staff that knew them well and benefitted from opportunities to take part in activities that they enjoyed.

The provider had management systems in place to audit, assess and monitor the quality of the service provided, to ensure that people were benefitting from a service that was continually developing.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse because the provider had effective systems in place and staff were aware of the processes they needed to follow.

Risks to people were appropriately assessed and recorded to support their safety and well-being.

People were supported by adequate numbers of staff on duty so that their needs were met.

People received their prescribed medicines as and when required.

Effective

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was effective.

People�s needs were met because staff had effective skills and knowledge to meet these needs.

People�s rights were protected because staff understood the legal principles to ensure that people were not unlawfully restricted and received care in line with their best interests.

People were supported with their nutritional needs.

People were supported to stay healthy.

Caring

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that were caring and knew them well.

People�s dignity, privacy and independence were promoted and maintained as much as reasonably possible.

People were treated with kindness and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was responsive.

People were supported to engage in activities that they enjoyed.

People�s needs and preferences were assessed by the provider to ensure that they were supported in the most appropriate way..

People were well supported to maintain relationships with people who were important to them.

People and their relatives understood the complaints process and how to use it if necessary..

Well-led

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was well led.

The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

People and relatives felt the management team was approachable and responsive to their requests.

Staff were supported and guided by the management team.