Archived: Florence House

Florence House Care Home is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to seven people who live with dementia type illnesses. On the day of our visit there were two people at the home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Staff were kind and respectful towards people. However, we read two records completed by two staff that had been written in a disrespectful tone about the person. The tone conveyed a lack of respect about the person and a lack of understanding around how to properly support people with dementia type illnesses.

People continued to be supported by staff who knew how to keep them safe. Medicines were managed and given to people safely. Medicines policies and procedures were up to date and easily available for staff. Emergency procedures and contingency plans were in place. These help to keep people safe in an emergency. To further support people to stay safe, staff used personal protective equipment when supporting people with intimate care. Infection control guidance was in place and staff had completed training in this subject. Safe recruitment procedures continued to be in place. Staff were supported in their role with training and supervision.

People were supported by a staff team who were stable and had built up warm relationships with them and their relatives. They understood how to meet each person's individual needs and knew people’s routines and preferences in their daily life.

Health and social care professionals worked with people at the home. People were well supported and their needs had been assessed. Care plans and risk assessments were in place to support staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.

People were supported to receive care that met their needs. Care plans reflected this. People and families were involved in regularly reviewing and updating them with the staff.

A relative we spoke too had praise for the home. They said, “We are very pleased indeed, they seem very kind they treat him as an individual.”

People enjoyed the food and their dietary needs were met. Care plans set out the ways to support people with these needs. People were supported by staff who understood how to support them to eat a healthy diet.

People took part in activities. People were encouraged to maintain contact with relatives and friends.

The overall quality of care and support was checked and monitored. This was undertaken through a range of audit systems. These identified areas for development and improvement. When these were picked up swift action was taken to improve the care and service even further.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was Good (report published April 2017)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

This was the services first inspection since registering with us in February 2016. The first person moved into the home in March 2016.

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.

People were receiving care that was responsive and effective. Care plans were in place that described how the person would like to be supported. The care plans provided staff with information to support the person effectively. People were evidently involved in the planning of their care. Comprehensive monthly reviews were completed involving the person. Other health and social professionals were involved in the care of the people living at Florence House.

People’s rights were upheld and they were involved in decisions about their care and support. Where decisions were more complex, these had been discussed with relatives and other health care professionals to ensure it was in the person’s best interest. Staff were knowledgeable about legislation to protect people in relation to making decisions and safeguards in respect of deprivation of liberty safeguards. Appropriate applications had been made in respect of these safeguards ensuring people were protected.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because there were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow the procedures. Systems were in place to ensure people were safe including risk management, checks on the environment and safe recruitment processes. Safe systems were in place to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff were caring and supportive and demonstrated a good understanding of their roles in supporting people. There was a real commitment to ensure staff had the appropriate training to support people effectively. Staff were supported in their roles. Systems were in place to ensure open communication including team meetings and daily handovers. A handover is where important information is shared between the staff during shift changeovers. This ensured important information was shared between staff enabling them to provide care that was safe, effective and consistent.

People were involved in activities in the home and the local community. These were organised taking into consideration the interests of the people. Staff recognised at times the home was very busy with visitors so activities were organised in the evenings. When there were lots of visitors, it was noted the lounge area was not big enough. People were encouraged to see their relatives in their bedroom or if a large party then they could access a day centre when it was not in use.

People’s views were sought through care reviews, house meetings and surveys and acted upon. Systems were in place to ensure that complaints were responded to, and learning from these was taken to improve the service provided.

The registered manager and the provider completed regular checks on the systems that were in operation in the home to ensure they were effective. Where there were any shortfalls an action plan had been developed to improve the service. The registered manager was in the process of making some improvements to the activities that people were doing and exploring local clubs and social events. There was a robust plan in place.

People were provided with a safe, effective, caring and responsive service that was well led. The organisation’s values and philosophy were clearly explained to staff. There was a positive culture where people felt included and their views were sought.