You are here

Farmhouse Residential Rest Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

This unannounced inspection took place on 21 November 2017. At our previous inspection in January 2017 we had found the service was not always safe, effective, caring, responsive or well led. We had found a breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made in all the areas and the provider was no longer in breach of Regulations.

Farmhouse Residential Rest Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 23 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. Five places at the service were for people who required a period of rehabilitation following a stay in hospital. There were 23 people using the service at the time of this inspection.

There was a registered manager in post who supported us throughout the inspection. 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 safeguarded from the risk of abuse as staff followed the local safeguarding procedures when they suspected abuse.

Risks of harm to people were mitigated through the effective use of risk assessments. Lessons were learned following accidents and incidents to reduce the risk of them occurring again.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to meet the needs of people in a safe way. New staff were employed through safe recruitment procedures to ensure they were fit and of good character to work with people.

People's medicines were stored and administered safely. There were infection control measures in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

People's needs were assessed holistically to achieve effective outcomes. People were cared for by staff who were trained and supported to fulfil their roles effectively.

People's nutritional needs were met and when people became unwell or their health care needs changed the appropriate health care advice was sought in a timely manner.

People were supported with their transition into and out of the service through information sharing and partnership work with other agencies.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were followed to ensure that people who lacked the mental capacity to agree to their care and support were supported to do so in their best interests.

The building and environment was being adapted to meet the needs of people who used the service.

People were treated with dignity and respect and their right to privacy was upheld.

People were involved in the planning of their care, offered choices and encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be.

People's needs were assessed and their preferences gained. We have recommended that further information is gained about people's diverse needs through the assessment process.

There were a range of hobbies and activities to support people to maintain active and promote their well being.

People were cared for with dignity at the end of their life and were comfortable and pain free.

The provider had a complaints procedure and complaints were dealt with appropriately.

There was clear vision and strategy to provide good quality of care. The governance systems the provider had in place to monitor and improve the service were effective in ensuring improvements were made.

People, their relatives, staff and other agencies were encouraged to have a say in how the service was run. The provider worked with other agencies to ensure a holistic approach to people's care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

The service was safe.

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse as staff knew what to do if they suspected abuse.

Risks of harm to people were assessed, minimised and managed to reduce the risk. Lessons were learned following incidents and accidents to reduce the risk of them occurring again.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had been safely recruited.

People's medicines were stored and administered safely.

Infection control procedures and cleaning schedules were in place and being followed to reduce the risk of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

The service was effective.

People who used the service received a holistic service and were supported by staff who were trained and effective in their roles.

People's needs were assessed and when their needs changed or they became unwell the appropriate health care support was gained in a timely manner.

Staff followed national guidance in delivering care that met people's needs in an effective way. The provider was following the principles of the MCA and ensuring that when people lacked the mental capacity to agree to their care they were supported to do so in their best interests.

The building and environment was adapted to meet people's individual needs and preferences.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

The service was caring.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

People were supported to make choices about their care and were encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be.

People's right to privacy was upheld.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

The service was responsive.

People's needs were assessed and their preferences respected.

People were supported at the end of their life to remain comfortable and pain free.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people felt able to complain.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 December 2017

The service was well led.

There was a clear vision and strategy to deliver high quality care and support.

The systems the provider had in place to monitor and improve the quality of care were effective.

People, their relatives, staff and professionals were asked their views on how the service was run.

Staff worked with other agencies to ensure that a holistic approach was taken to people's care.

Analysis of accidents and incidents meant that lessons were learned and the quality of care was improved.