You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The inspection took place on 30 January 2018 and was unannounced. This meant the service did not know we were coming. This was the first inspection since the service registered with their new provider HC-One Oval Limited on 3 February 2017. During this inspection we found the service was meeting the requirements of the current legislation.

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

Summerhill Care Home accommodates up to 71 people across four separate units on two floors, Buttermere, Windermere, Grasmere and Thirlmere, each of which had separate facilities. Buttermere specialised in general nursing care, Windermere specialised in nursing care of people living with dementia, Grasmere specialised in high dependency personal care with mental health needs and Thirlmere specialised in people with personal care needs only.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our 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.

Records had been completed in relation to medicines management and people we spoke with told us they were happy with how their medicines were managed.

Staff we spoke with understood the appropriate procedures to take when dealing with any abuse allegations. Records we looked at confirmed the actions taken as a result of any allegations of abuse as well as any lessons learned.

Safe recruitment procedures were in place. Relevant checks had been completed. Staffing levels supported the safe delivery of care to people who used the service. Staff we spoke with confirmed they had received training that supported them to fulfil their role effectively.

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 support this practice.

We saw a positive dining experience was provided to people who used the service. Meals were varied and choices were seen.

It was clear people were happy with their care. Staff were observed treating people with dignity and respect and ensuring their privacy was maintained. Records contained information in them about how to ensure people were supported with their communication.

Care files were detailed and reflected people’s individual needs, choices and likes. People told us they had been involved in reviews about their care.

Systems to deal with complaints were in place. People who used the service and their relatives told us they knew the procedure to raise any concerns.

We received complimentary feedback about the registered manager. It was clear the registered manager had oversight of the service and was working to ensure a smooth transition with the new provider.

Comprehensive and detailed audits were taking place that ensured the home was safe and monitored for people to live in. Records included any actions required as a result of the findings.

Team meetings were completed regularly we saw records of minutes from the meetings. Positive feedback about the quality of the service was seen.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The service was safe.

Medicines were managed safely in the home. People we spoke with said they were happy with their medicines.

Staff we spoke with understood the appropriate procedures to take when dealing with allegations of abuse.

Safe recruitment procedures were in place. Relevant checks had been completed. Staffing levels supported the safe delivery of care to people who used the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The service was effective.

Relevant capacity assessment had been completed and applications had been submitted to the relevant authorities.

We saw a positive dining experience was provided to people who used the service. Meals were varied and choices were seen.

The building was purpose built and all of the units in the home had lounge, dining and bathroom facilities available to people who used the service.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The service was caring.

People we spoke with were happy with the care they received and told us staff treated them with dignity and respect.

People told us and records confirmed they had been involved in decisions about their care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The service was responsive.

Care files were detailed and reflected people�s individual needs, choices and likes. People told us they had been involved in reviews about their care.

We saw systems had been developed using technology to review audits and quality monitoring.

Activities were varied and were tailored around people�s individual likes and choices.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 March 2018

The service was well-led.

We received complimentary feedback about the registered manager.

Comprehensive and detailed audits were taking place that ensured the home was safe and monitored for people to live in.

Team meetings were completed regularly we saw records of minutes from the meetings.