Moorfield House

Updated 30 May 2025

Date of Inspection: 23 July to 14 August 2025. Moorfield House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 35 people. The service provides support to people with physical disabilities and people who were living with a dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 33 people using the service.

At the last inspection we found the provider had made improvements but continued to be in breach of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and governance. We issued the provider with a warning notice because the quality and assurance systems in place did not allow for effective oversight of people at risk of choking. We completed this inspection to review the service and check whether the issues identified in the warning notice had been addressed. Improvements had been made, and the service was no longer in breach of legal regulations.

Staff treated people with dignity and kindness. Staff worked with people to ensure they could still take everyday risks, and the activity co-ordinators ensured people engaged in meaningful occupation. At mealtimes for those people who stayed in their bedrooms staff carried their meals and drinks upstairs on trays. During the inspection the regional manager purchased a hot lock (which is a large container that keeps food warm whilst it is moved through the service), which would fit in the lifts, and they were in the process of installing tea-making facilities across the service to support people to continue to eat where they wished. They also ensured equipment in the kitchen was repaired and an air conditioning unit fitted to the storage area.

Assessments were completed in a timely manner. We discussed enhancements that could be made so the information clearly described how people presented and the actions staff should take when working with people. Staff had received training around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated code of practice. DoLS applications were appropriately submitted. We discussed the use of capacity assessments and ‘best interests’ decisions and how these could be extended to all aspects of care where staff were imposing restrictions, or the person could not give their consent. The registered manager took immediate action to address this.

People received a nutritious diet. A new menu had been introduced which was currently being reviewed with people who used the service to ensure it reflected their preferences. Medicines were safely managed. Staff worked with local healthcare professionals and sought advice when required. Staff worked very effectively as a team to ensure people’s support needs were met. The activities team provided people with the opportunity to join in a wide range of entertainment both inside and outside of the service. They sensitively worked with people to find out how to improve their quality of life.

The registered manager ensured there was a system in place to encourage continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the service. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. A deputy manager was in the process of being recruited who would assist the registered manager oversee the service. The provider and registered manager were making sure the quality assurance system they had in place was effective. They encouraged people to share their views and always looked to see what improvements could be made.

Updated 30 May 2025

People told us staff were very caring, kind and supportive. Relatives also found staff were kind and respectful. People were complimentary about how well staff worked with them. Staff ensured the quality of the care people received was good. A person said, “I must say this is a good place to live; the staff are kind and helpful, the food is very good and we have plenty to do.” A relative said, “Overall, I think Moorfield is an outstanding care home. It has always provided very good care but has recently moved towards exceptional with a brilliant activities coordinator as well as staff that go above and beyond including [a range of staff] who always have time to discuss my mother’s wellbeing and who go above and beyond.” Where people had very limited verbal communication, we used a structured observation tool to assess whether they received good care. This approach showed people were included and listened to and staff consistently interacted positively with them. Staff worked with people in a sensitive, caring and considerate manner. They understood how to support people to reduce any distress they might be experiencing.

People felt safe and their human rights were fully promoted. People were encouraged to make decisions and told us they felt listened to and consulted around how their care and support should be provided. A relative said, “As is inevitable in a place caring for a number of vulnerable residents, there have been a few minor incidents affecting [person]. With all of these, as with concerns about their health, I have been informed promptly, and I believe the matters have been dealt with appropriately.” We heard how staff found inventive and creative ways to effectively support people to manage thoughts and feelings, which caused them distress. People felt staff were competent and knowledgeable. People felt able to complain and were confident action would be taken and improvements would be made. A relative said, “We are really pleased [Person] has moved here. They settled really well and are happy. The staff are easy to talk to and keep us up to date.” A person said, “The staff are good to me and always ask what I want.”