Archived: Magna Nursing Home

Magna Nursing Home is residential care home providing personal care to younger and older adults with a physical disability, dementia and mental health needs. The service can support up to 35 people across two separate floors. 25 people lived at the home at the time of inspection.

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

People were safe, risks were assessed, monitored and well managed. A person told us, "I feel very safe and happy, the carers look after us well." Staffing levels met people’s personalised care needs. Staff followed good practice guidelines to prevent the spread of infection and gave people their medicines safely. The home was clean and tidy.

People were supported to access health and social care professionals. Dietary needs were assessed, and guidance provided in care plans. People received enough food to eat and drink. A relative told us, “The food is good quality and all residents are fed well.” People told us they were happy with the variety and choice and provided positive feedback and menu suggestions.

There were various activities on offer for people to engage in as they wished. People were supported with their interests and links with the community were maintained. Families were welcomed to the home. There was a complaints procedure in place and the provider responded to complaints appropriately.

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 and relatives told us the staff were kind and caring. A relative said. “The staff have good skills and provide sensitive and caring support for my [relative].” Care plans contained detailed, personalised information. The management team continued to review the care and support provided.

The registered manager carried out regular checks on the quality and safety of the service and understood their regulatory responsibilities. People gave positive feedback about the management. A person said, “The registered manager’s door is always open, I am always greeted with a smile.” Staff were positive, stating the registered manager was open and supportive.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good. Published (21 June 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.

People and their relatives confirmed they received safe care. Staff were aware of the safeguarding policies and procedures and had received training in how to protect people from avoidable harm.

Staff recruitment was robust and prospective staff undertook appropriate checks prior to starting work at the service. Mostly there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs. However some relatives felt that at certain times during the day, for example, during staff breaks there needed to be more staff available. Medicines were administered safely.

People were supported by staff who were knowledgeable about them and who had undertaken sufficient training to meet people’s needs. Staff received regular supervision and were encouraged to attend staff meetings. This ensured that staff could continue to provide effective care. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

Staff were encouraged to develop positive relationships with people. People and their relatives described staff as caring and that they treated people with respect and kindness. People had detailed personalised plans of care in place to enable staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences. Where we identified a care plan as being out of date the registered manager responded promptly to make the necessary changes.

People and relatives told us that they had no concerns or complaints about the service. They were aware of and had access to the registered provider’s complaints policy. They would speak to staff if they had any concerns.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager was visible in the home which was appreciated by both people using the service and staff.

The registered manager used a range of methods to assess, monitor and improve the service. These included regular audits of the service and staff and service user meetings to seek the views of people about the quality of care being provided.

At our last inspection we found poor practice in the care of people with dementia and, following an incident in the home, evidence that a care plan was not fit for purpose. In addition nutrition was not being well managed, and some of the people who used the service had a poor experience of mealtimes.

Since then a new manager, Mrs Salome Mapfeka, has been appointed and has worked with the staff team to bring about improvements to the standard of care and nutrition. She has also consulted with the people who used the service and their families to help ensure they are getting the care they need. One relative told us 'The new manager's lovely. I could talk to her about anything.'

Relatives told us the home had changed for the better. One relative said, 'It's much better than when you first came, the new manager is licking the place into shape. She listens and gets things done.' Another commented, 'It seems like the care workers are more caring now.'

Relatives also told us they thought mealtimes had improved and were less-rushed. One relative said, 'The staff help people who can't feed themselves and the meals are well-balanced and always look nice.' We observed that when meals were served the atmosphere was relaxed and happy and people had the assistance they needed.

Relatives' views on the care provided were mixed. One told us they were 'very satisfied' and another said the care was good and rated the home 8/10. Two others said they had little confidence in quality of the care provided. We were concerned about dementia care in the home and observed that people were not always treated with respect (see Outcome 4).

There were also mixed views about nutrition. One of the people who used the service told us, 'The food is pretty good ' I quite enjoy it.' One relative said their family member had gained weight since coming to the home, but two others were concerned their family members had lost weight.

Some staff seemed more intent on supervising the people who used the service than interacting with them. A relative told us, 'The staff are in here (one of the lounges) so why don't they talk to the residents or do something with them?' However some staff communicated well with people. Another relative said, 'They are always sitting with my (relative) and chatting to her.

Two relatives told us they'd raised concerns but were not been satisfied with how they'd been dealt with. One person said a staff member was 'argumentative' when they complained and 'off' with them afterwards. Another relative said they had raised concerns but weren't sure if they had been recorded or not.

People were encouraged to make choices about their care, activities, and meals. A relative told is, 'At mealtimes the staff bring round the menu and ask my relative what she wants. If I'm not here to help her decide they know her likes and dislikes so they choose for her.'

Relatives said the home provided a wide range of activities for people. Comments included, 'The activities are good and although my relative can't always take part she likes being there and getting a sense of being part of something.', and, 'The carers sit individually with the residents and reminisce with them. A lot of individual work goes on with the residents here.'

The staff team were enthusiastic about their work and had a warm and caring approach to the people who used the service. A relative told us, 'The staff are always patient because they understand the residents' needs.'

Relatives said the new acting manager provided good leadership. One person told us, 'I have total confidence in the new manager, she's a people person who puts relationships first, she listens, and she cares about the residents and the staff.'