You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 29 October 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Clarendon House is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 23 older people, including people living with dementia. The care home provides accommodation in one adapted building. There were 23 people living at the home on the day of our inspection visit.

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

Staff understood how to keep people safe and protect people from avoidable harm. Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew what to do if they had concerns about people’s well-being.

Risks associated with people’s care had been assessed and management plans were completed for identified risks. There were enough staff to keep people safe and to meet their needs. There were safe procedures to manage people’s medicines and to prevent the spread of infection.

People’s needs were assessed to ensure they could be met by the service. Staff received training and support to carry out their roles effectively. 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.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. People had a choice of food and were encouraged to have enough to eat and drink. The managers and staff worked closely with other healthcare professionals to ensure people's health and wellbeing was promoted and maintained.

Staff and managers were caring and spoke positively about the people living in the home. Staff knew people well, they promoted people’s privacy and supported people to do things for themselves where possible. People were offered opportunities to engage in activities of interest to them and were supported to maintain relationships with important people in their lives.

People’s plans were personalised. Staff had time to read plans and were kept up to date about people’s care and support. People and relatives were provided with opportunities and information about making complaints.

The registered manager was passionate about providing good dementia care and was supported by the provider to implement new initiatives to promote people’s wellbeing.

The provider and registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and had effective processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. Quality checks were carried out by the registered manager and provider, which identified where improvements could be made.

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

Rating at last inspection

The rating at the last inspection was good (published 25 May 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 carried out on 28 April 2017

During a routine inspection

Clarendon House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 23 older people, including people living with dementia. There were 21 people living at the home on the day of our inspection visit.

At the last inspection of the service in November 2014 we rated the service as Good. Since the last inspection the provider had changed their provider name to Clarendon House Limited. This meant the service was required to be re-inspected and rated. We inspected Clarendon House on 28 April 2017. The inspection was unannounced.

There was a registered manager for the service. 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.

The provider had policies and procedures to make sure people remained safe at Clarendon House. These included a safeguarding procedure and a process to manage risks associated with people’s care. Staff understood their responsibilities for keeping people safe and for reporting concerns about abuse or poor practice within the home. Staff were properly checked before they could work in the home and there was an effective procedure for managing people’s medicines.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Where people had their liberty restricted in their best interests, applications had been submitted to, or authorised by the Supervisory Body. Staff understood how to support people to make decisions about their daily lives.

There were enough suitably trained staff available to keep people safe and to respond to people’s needs. Staff received the training and support they needed to meet people’s needs effectively.

Staff had good knowledge of people’s needs, preferences and abilities and provided safe and effective care to people. Staff had a handover meeting when they came on shift to keep them up to date about people’s care needs. Care records contained individualised information about how people liked to receive their care. The provider used a computerised care planning system that provided up to date information about people’s care needs to staff.

People told us staff were kind and caring. Throughout our visit staff showed people kindness and treated people with respect. People were treated as individuals and were encouraged to make choices about their care. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity when providing care.

There were processes to ensure people’s nutritional needs were met and people had enough to eat and drink during the day. People’s health needs were monitored and people were referred to healthcare professionals when a need was identified.

People were supported to pursue individual hobbies and some activities were available to people. The registered manager was looking at ways to develop the activities programme so people would be better occupied and stimulated during the day.

Relatives and friends could visit people at any time. People's feedback was sought by provider surveys and meetings held in the home. People knew how to raise concerns or complaints and information about making complaints was displayed in the home. The registered manager had an ‘open door’ procedure for anyone who needed to see them.

The provider and registered manager had systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service. This was through feedback from people and staff, and a programme of regular checks and audits on care records and the environment.