You are here

Clova House Residential Care Home Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 1 November 2019

About the service

Clova House is a residential care home, providing personal care support for up to 20 people. At the time of our inspection 19 people were using the service.

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

People told us that there were sometimes not enough staff. We observed staff working hard to meet people’s needs. Rota’s confirmed there were sometimes less staff, this would impact on timeliness of staff support.

Medicines were given as prescribed, however sufficient records were not always kept. This could impact on the safe administration of medicine.

Some mental capacity assessments were not in place. This meant people were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. These policies and systems put people at risk of not being supported in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests.

The environment was not sufficiently clean and required some renovation. The registered manager advised that renovation was planned.

People told us they felt safe. Staff had good knowledge of how to support people and records were in place to guide safe care. Care was delivered in line with recognised standards. Different professionals visited the service and their advice was documented and followed.

Staff were not always safely recruited, for example one staff member had no references from a previous role. Staff had not received all their training, but we did not see any impact on their work. Staff had good knowledge.

People had access to a balanced diet. They spoke positively about the quality of the food supplied at the service. Where people required support to eat, this was done in a caring way.

Staff were caring and we observed positive interactions between people and staff. People were treated with dignity and respect. People were supported to have good quality care at the end of their lives.

People could complete routines as they preferred. Staff knew peoples preferences. People’s diverse needs (for example, religion) were recognised and supported. The service told us that they had activities provided at the service, we observed a visiting activity provider. There were no records kept of activities for us to assess the range of activities at the service.

People were given information in a way they could understand. This met the legal requirement of the accessible information standard (2016).

People told us that they felt they would be listened to if they made a complaint. No formal complaints had been made since the last inspection.

The registered manager and staff spoke clearly about how people’s experiences and needs always come first. There was a clear governance framework to ensure people’s needs were met safely and effectively. Where concerns were raised at the inspection visit, the provider responded promptly to our concerns. They advised they will work to address these concerns and improve the service. We will assess the effectiveness of this at our next inspection.

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 (published 22 March 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 1 November 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our safe findings below

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 1 November 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our effective findings below

Caring

Good

Updated 1 November 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our caring findings below

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 November 2019

The service was responsive

Details are in our responsive findings below

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 November 2019

The service was well led

Details are in our well led findings below