You are here

Seely Hirst House Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service has requested a review of one or more of the ratings.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 30 August 2019

About the service: Seely Hirst House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, both were looked at during this inspection.

The care home accommodates up to 38 older people, including some people who were living with dementia, in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection 27 people lived there.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿The provider had made improvements to the management of risk for falls and behaviours that challenge, fluid intake, infection prevention and control and cleanliness and the application of topical medicines.

¿This meant the provider was no longer in breach of Regulation 9, 12 and 18 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

¿However, the provider had failed to ensure equipment used to help people move had been inspected as required. Not all staff who administered medicines had had their competency checked in line with good practice recommendations and we found topical creams were not always stored securely in people’s bedrooms. They had also failed to ensure their systems and processes to assess and monitor the quality and safety of services and investigate complaints were effective. In addition, the provider had not always worked effectively with other professionals to ensure continuous learning.

¿This meant they were still in breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

¿Risks in the environment, such as from legionella were monitored and checked. Risks associated with people’s healthcare conditions were identified and managed. Procedures were in place and followed by staff, to ensure infection protection and control practices were effective.

¿Sufficient staff were available to meet people’s needs and staff were deployed to ensure people received support in communal areas. Staff understood what actions to take to protect people from harm and abuse. The registered manager looked to learn from incidents and make improvements when things went wrong.

¿People’s needs were assessed and monitored and people’s diverse needs were supported. Policies and procedures helped to ensure care was delivered in line with current standards.

¿Staff received support and supervision to help them work effectively in their roles, although not all staff were up to date with the areas the provider had identified they required for their job role.

¿Staff made referrals to other professionals for their advice and guidance regarding people’s care when needed. People had access to other healthcare services as required.

¿People had choices of food and drink to help them maintain a balanced diet. Staff supported people with their meals and drinks when needed.

¿People liked their home and the premises had been adapted to meet their needs.

¿People felt cared for by staff. People’s views were taken into account when their care was planned. Staff took steps to ensure people’s privacy and dignity was respected. People’s independence was promoted.

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

¿People received personalised and responsive care and enjoyed how they spent their time at the service.

¿People had experienced a variable quality of experience when they had made a complaint; plans were in place to ensure people received a consistent and robust response to any complaint made. Information was available on how to complain. People’s communication needs were identified and met.

¿ The registered manager was keen to ensure care promoted positive outcomes for people. The registered manager was considered to be open and approachable. People and staff felt listened to and had opportunities to be involved in the servi

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 30 August 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 August 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 30 August 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 30 August 2019

The service was not well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.