You are here

Archived: Durranhill Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 15 August 2018

This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 13 June 2018. We previously inspected this service in March 2017 and found the following breach of the Health and Social Care Act; Regulation 18 Staffing. We rated the service as 'Requires Improvement'. Following the last inspection, we met with the provider and asked them to complete an action plan to show what they would do, and by when, to improve the service.

Durranhill is a period property set in large grounds to the east of Carlisle city centre.

Durranhill 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.

The home had a suitably qualified and experienced temporary manager in place. At the time of our inspection they were not the manager. 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.

The staff team understood how to protect vulnerable adults from harm and abuse. Staff had received suitable training and could talk to us about how they would identify any issues and how they would report them appropriately. Risk assessments and risk management plans supported people well. Arrangements were in place to ensure that new members of staff had been suitably checked before commencing employment. Any accidents or incidents had been reported to the Care Quality Commission and suitable action taken to lessen the risk of further issues.

The manager had ensured that there were now sufficient staff to support people. Staff were suitably inducted, trained and developed to give the best support possible. We met experienced and confident team members who understood people's needs as well as new staff who were keen to learn.

Medicines were appropriately managed in the service with people having reviews of their medicines on a regular basis. People in the home saw their GP and health specialists whenever necessary.

Good assessment of need was in place and the staff team analysed the outcomes of care for effectiveness. We saw people enjoying the food they had cooked with staff support.

The home required refurbishment, the provider was working closely with their landlord to improve this and agreed to refurbish the home within 12 months.

The staff team were aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. 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 supported this practice.

We observed kind, patient and suitable support being provided by staff who knew people well. They made sure that confidentiality, privacy and dignity were maintained. People were encouraged to maintain and develop their independence and encouraged people to follow their own interests and hobbies as part of their rehabilitation. No one was receiving end of life care when we visited but there were plans in place and training available should the need arise.

Support plans provided detailed and relevant guidance for staff in the home. People in the service were involved in the writing of support plans and were able to influence the content. The management team had ensured the plans reflected the person centred care that was being delivered.

The manager demonstrated good vision and values. Staff were able to discuss good practice, issues around equality and diversity and people's rights. The service had a comprehensive quality monitoring system in place which was used to support future planning.

Inspection areas



Updated 15 August 2018

The service was safe.

There were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs.

Staff were knowledgeable about abuse and knew how to report it in order to keep people safe.

Medicines were managed appropriately.



Updated 15 August 2018

The service was effective.

People's needs were being thoroughly assessed.

The staff were well-trained, competent and confident in their approach.

People's nutrition and hydration needs were being met.



Updated 15 August 2018

The service was caring.

People were able to access advocacy services if they wished.

Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness.

People were supported to live independent lives.



Updated 15 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People's support plans reflected their assessed needs.

People engaged in meaningful one-to-one activities.

There was a complaints policy and procedure in place.


Requires improvement

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was well-led.

The manager had a clear vision for the future of the service.

People were consulted about the way the service was run.

The quality assurance system helped support continuous improvement in the service.