Archived: Coplands Nursing Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

The provider had infection control policies and procedures and had systems to ensure cleanliness and hygiene was maintained and monitored. Our observations indicated these systems were adhered to. However, the auditing system did not record how any identified problems had been managed. Staff had received training in infection control.

Systems were in place to make sure staff reported accidents and incidents, complaints and other concerns and action was taken when required. The provider had suitable procedures to manage emergencies. Staff had received the necessary training to respond to emergencies and were aware of the relevant contacts for help and support.

The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and followed these procedures correctly when needed.

Is the service effective?

People using the service experienced personalised care which was planned and scheduled to meet their needs and minimise any risks to their health and well-being. Specialist dietary, medical and other needs and preferences had been identified in care plans along with other personal details on family background and religious and cultural needs.

People using the service were asked to give consent to the care and support they received. Care records had been signed by people receiving care or their representative to indicate their agreement to their care arrangements. Daily records were maintained to ensure the care delivered reflected the agreed care. Staff identified concerns or changes to people's needs enabling them to respond promptly.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers understood people's individual needs and limitations and communicated with them in an appropriate manner. People requiring individual attention had their care and support scheduled to meet their needs.

People using the service and their relatives completed an annual satisfaction survey. The latest report showed a good level of satisfaction with the care provided. The provider held regular meetings for people and their relatives so they could express their views.

People we spoke with and their relatives were happy with the care and support they experienced. Two relatives, one who was a volunteer at the home, both said the home was very good and staff cared. Another person who continued to visit the home said staff offered very good care and their relative had been well looked after.

Is the service responsive?

Care had been reviewed on a monthly basis and any changes were reflected in individual care plans. Records showed the care delivered reflected the current care plan and relatives were informed of updates and changes to the well-being of their family members and the care provided.

There was a program of activities and entertainment organised to help to keep people involved in the daily life of the home and interact with others.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. They had access to a complaints procedure. We looked at how one complaint had been dealt with, and found the responses had been open, thorough, and timely. People could therefore be assured complaints were investigated and actions were taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had a variety of systems to monitor the quality of service provided and audit their performance. People using the service and their relatives had regular opportunities to provide feedback on their care and express their views. There were appropriate procedures for dealing with complaints and reporting accidents and incidents.

Staff received appropriate training, supervision and support. There were arrangements for reviewing performance on a regular basis and a formal appraisal system so that appropriate training and personal development could be planned.

We looked at a sample of care records on each of the units. Most of the risk assessments and support plans had been reviewed and updated so that staff had up to date information on each person's needs and how they wished to be supported.

The care records that we saw showed that people were assessed regularly for the risk of malnutrition. We saw evidence that actions were taken when people were losing weight, including referral to the GP.

People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink.

A visiting relative said that the meals looked 'absolutely lovely.'

Staff records showed that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff were employed, to show that they were fit to work with vulnerable adults.

Staff said that there were sufficient staff at all times to meet the needs of the people in all areas of the home. A visiting relative said, 'The carers are absolutely brilliant. They are all approachable.'

However care plan files were not organised in a way that provided easy access to information about each person's needs. On one unit where some people displayed behaviours that challenged, we found no care plans or risk assessments to provide information for staff on managing their behaviour.

Everyone in the home was assessed regularly for the risk of malnutrition. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink. Appropriate food was available for specific dietary needs, including for people who were diabetic or who had an allergy to gluten.

There was one unit specifically for nine people of Asian origin. The care staff working on this unit spoke Gujarati, which was the majority language for people living there. An Asian chef prepared vegetarian curries specifically for this unit to meet people's dietary preferences. Our observations showed that there were not enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs in this unit.

On all units we observed a lack of activity and opportunities for stimulation for people. One person told us, 'I enjoy life, but I would like more to do.' In one unit we observed that people were left in their rooms, or were seated in front of a television in the lounge. Several people spent long periods asleep.