We carried out a review of the data available to us about Sairam Villa Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Sairam Villa Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People felt safe and were protected from avoidable harm. Staff understood how to keep people safe and how to report any concerns they may have. Staff knew about the risks associated with people's care and understood how to minimise risks to them. Further information was available in care plans for staff to refer to. Staff supported people to take their medicines as prescribed. Staff understood how to prevent the spread of infection.
People received care from a consistent team of staff who understood their needs. Staff were recruited safely, and processes checked the background of potential new staff. People's needs were assessed to ensure they could be met by the service. Staff received the training and guidance they needed to complete their role well. The manager encouraged staff to expand their knowledge through specialised training. People made their own decisions about their care and were supported by staff who understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
People were offered choices. For example, in the meals and drinks they were offered. Staff respected people's rights to privacy and dignity. People received information about the service in a way that was appropriate to their needs. Over 75% of staff supporting people who used the service spoke Guajarati and some polices and procedures were translated into Guajarati and provided in other user friendly formats.
People were involved in planning their care. Care plans contained the information and guidance staff needed to support people. People were offered and took part in a range of meaningful activities. Systems were in place to manage and respond to any complaints or concerns raised. People were supported to stay at Sairam Villa until the end of their lives.
The manager had robust systems and processes to monitor quality within the home. The manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and shared information with stakeholders in a timely way.
Rating at last inspection: During our last inspection we rated Sairam Villa Care Home good. (Report published December 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the date and the rating of the previous inspection.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Sairam Villa Care Home can care for 46 people, in single rooms, all of which have en-suite wet rooms. All rooms have telephones and TV channels, including Asian TV. The home has 3 floors, with each floor having a dedicated care team to ensure continuity of care. Sairam Villa Care Home has a variety of areas for people to enjoy, including four lounges, three dining areas, a prayer and silence room, a hair salon, and pamper therapy room. Access to the garden is from the lounge area on the ground floor. The landscaped garden has been designed to give quiet private areas, as well as larger spaces for social activities. There is also a terrace garden leading out from the first floor dining room. This is a usable space which is enclosed for safety. A balcony area on the 2nd floor is also available. During the day of this inspection Sai Ram Villa Care Home accommodated 16 people and provided care and support on two floors.
A manager has been appointed and is currently in the process of being registered with CQC. 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.
We found outstanding features in this service for example the environment was of very high standard and the provider gave considerable thought to the needs of the people when designing the premises. For example Close Circuit Television (CCTV) was in all communal areas for the protection of people and staff. All people had access to broadband, provided they had a device to access the internet. Movies, prayers and activities can be streamed into people’s rooms in case people were bedbound. This ensured nobody was excluded from activities and was able to take part in activities if people wished. A therapy room was available for people where they could access alternative therapies and massage, as well as a separate hairdressing salon. This demonstrated the service and adaptations were designed around people who used the service and their needs.
The staff of the service had access to the organisational policy and procedure for protection of people from abuse. The members of staff we spoke with said that they had training about protecting people from abuse, which we verified on training records and these staff were able to give detailed responses about the action they would take if a concern arose. We found that staff had a sound level of understanding of how to keep people safe from harm and this knowledge helped to protect the people using the service.
We saw that risks assessments concerning falls, healthcare conditions and risks associated with daily living and activities were detailed, and were regularly reviewed. The instructions for staff were clear and described what action staff should take to reduce these risks and how to respond if new risks emerged.
There were policies, procedures and information available in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected. The service was applying MCA and DoLS safeguards appropriately and making the necessary applications for assessments when these were required.
We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered in a consistent way. People using the service had complex needs and we found that the information and guidance provided to staff was clear.
It was clear that significant efforts were made to engage and stimulate people with activities whether these were day to day living activities or those for leisure time. One to one time was provided for people to maximise their opportunities to engage in normal life experiences.
Everyone we spoke with who used the service, and relatives, praised staff for their caring attitudes. The care plans we looked at showed that considerable emphasis was given to how staff could ascertain each person’s wishes including people with limited verbal communication and to maximise opportunities for people to make as many choices that they were meaningfully able to make. We saw that staff were approachable and friendly towards people and based their interactions on each person as an individual, taking the time needed to find out how people were feeling and what they could do to help.
Staff views about the way the service operated were respected as was evident from conversations that we had with staff and that we observed. We saw that staff were involved in decisions and kept updated of changes in the service and were able to feedback their views at handover meetings, staff team meetings and during supervision meetings.
The service complied with the provider’s requirement to carry out regular audits of all aspects of the service. The provider carried out regular reviews of the service and regularly sought people’s feedback on how well the service operated.