You are here

Archived: Leycester House Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

This inspection took place on 22 March 2017 and was unannounced.

Leycester House is registered to provide accommodation with nursing and personal care for up to 78 people. Leycester House is a new, purpose built home in which care is provided across three floors. Residential care is provided on the ground floor, nursing care on the first floor and the second floor is for people living with dementia. The home opened in September 2016 and at the time of our inspection visit there were 19 people living there. This was the first inspection of the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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 told us they felt safe and secure living at Leycester House. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe, and were encouraged and supported to raise any concerns about people’s health or wellbeing. Risks to people’s safety had been identified and assessed and care plans contained risk management plans for staff to follow to keep people safe.

There were enough staff on duty to keep people safe and be responsive to their physical, social and emotional needs. Staffing levels allowed people to make full use of all the facilities the home had to offer, and go out on trips in groups or individually. The provider’s interview and recruitment process ensured risks to people’s safety were minimised, and that staff with the right skills, knowledge and values were brought in to work at the home. Staff received the right training and support to carry out their roles effectively.

The registered manager and staff were clear about their responsibilities to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff recognised the importance of respecting people’s right to make their own decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink enough for their needs. People enjoyed the quality of the food and said they always had a choice of a meat, fish and vegetarian option at lunchtime. People’s records included a nutritional assessment and care plan for those identified as at risk.

People were supported to maintain good health and to access healthcare services when needed. Records showed that medicines were managed and stored safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People told us all the staff were kind, sensitive and caring in their approach. People had developed friendly relationships with each other and staff played an integral part in ensuring they were happy, supported and well cared for. People valued the staff and staff evidently cared about people and enjoyed working in the home. Staff respected people’s right to privacy and dignity.

The provider’s philosophy was to create a friendly, welcoming environment for the people who lived in the home, as well as their family and friends. Visitors could share meals at no extra cost and told us they always felt welcomed by the staff.

Each person had a care plan which was detailed and written around their individual needs and contained valuable person centred information. Staff understood people’s needs and preferences and were interested in them as individuals.

People were supported to take part in activities they found meaningful and fulfilling and were given opportunities to develop new interests. People were offered regular entertainment and people from the local community were invited to attend, as well as family and friends. Activities and entertainment had a positive effect on keeping people motivated and socially involved.

The provider’s vision and values to provide high quality care was understood and shared by staff. All staff had a sense of pride and own

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was safe.

Staffing levels ensured people received safe, effective care and were able to live their lives as they wished. The provider�s recruitment procedures ensured only those with the right values were employed at the home. Risks to people�s health and wellbeing had been identified and risk management plans provided staff with the information to keep people safe. People received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was effective.

People�s needs were met by staff who received training and support to provide effective care. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The registered manager understood their legal obligations under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were able to choose from a varied menu and supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People had access to healthcare professionals when they needed them.

Caring

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was caring.

People valued staff who they told us treated them with great kindness, care and friendship. Staff respected people's choices and supported people in a caring and dignified way. The home provided a caring environment for people and their visitors to spend quality time together.

Responsive

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans contained valuable person centred information which guided staff to provide support that was responsive to people�s individual needs and preferences. People had access to a wide range of activities that supported them to follow their hobbies and interests and develop new ones. People told us they would not hesitate to share any concerns they had with staff.

Well-led

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff were enthusiastic about the service and understood and shared the provider�s vision to deliver high quality care. Staff enjoyed working at Leycester House and felt supported by a management team who valued their views. People and relatives were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the service to ensure planned improvements focused on people�s experiences.