You are here

Archived: Summerfield House Nursing Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 September 2015

We inspected Summerfield House Nursing Home on 30 July 2015 and the visit was unannounced.

Our last inspection took place on 10 April 2013 and, at that time, we found the regulations we looked at were being met.

Summerfield House Nursing Home is a 106-bed purpose built service and is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for older people and people living with dementia. Nursing care is provided. At the time of our visit there were 99 people using the service.

Summerfield House Nursing Home is a is a purpose built care home with nursing situated approximately 1.5 miles from Halifax town centre. The accommodation is arranged over three floors. All of the bedrooms are singles with an en-suite toilet, some also have a shower. There are lounges and dining areas on each floor.

The service has a registered 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.

Although people told us they felt safe we found we found when people had reported missing property staff had not followed the procedure to ensure a thorough investigation.

Recruitment processes were not robust as thorough checks were not always completed before staff started work to make sure they were safe and suitable to work in the care sector.

There were enough staff on duty to make sure people’s care needs were met and activities were on offer to keep people occupied and stimulated. We saw people enjoying a book club meeting and music for heath session during our visit.

Staff told us they felt supported by the manager and that training opportunities were good. People and relatives we spoke with told us they liked the staff

The home is well appointed, well maintained and comfortably furnished. People’s bedrooms were personalised and we found everywhere was clean and tidy.

We found people had access to healthcare services and these were accessed in a timely way to make sure people’s health care needs were met. The medication system was well managed and people received their medicines at the right times.

On the day of our visit we saw people looked well cared for. We saw staff speaking calmly and respectfully to people who used the service. Staff demonstrated they knew people’s individual preferences and what they needed to do to meet people’s care needs.

We found the service was meeting the legal requirements relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People told us the meals were good. There was a choice available for each meal and the chef was aware of people’s preferences.

Visitors told us they were always made to feel welcome and if they had any concerns or complaints they would feel able to take these up with the manager.

We saw there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. When areas for improvement were identified action was taken to address the shortfalls. People using the service were asked for their views and the registered manager was in the process of responding to their requests.

We found two breaches of regulations and you can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 16 September 2015

The service was not always safe. Recruitment procedures were not robust and staff had been employed without their suitability being fully explored. The home’s procedure had not been followed when people’s personal property had been reported missing.

The accommodation was spacious, well maintained, comfortable furnished and clean.

There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs and people received they medicines at the right times.

Effective

Good

Updated 16 September 2015

The service was effective. We saw from the records staff had a programme of training and were trained to care and support people who used the service. The service was meeting the legal requirements relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The menus we saw offered variety and choice and provided a well-balanced diet for people who used the service.

Records showed people had regular access to healthcare professionals, such as GPs, opticians, district nurses and podiatrists.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 September 2015

The service was caring. People using the services told us they liked the staff and found them patient and kind. We saw staff treating people in a dignified and compassionate way.

Care plans were easy to follow and contained information about people’s life histories and personal preferences. This information was used by staff to provide person centred care.

Relatives told us they were made to feel welcome and could visit at any time.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 September 2015

The service was responsive. People’s health, care and support needs were assessed and individual choices and preferences were discussed. Care plans were in place and had been reviewed on a monthly basis.

There was an activities programme in place to offer people occupation and stimulation and we saw people involved in activities during our visit.

We saw from the records complaints were responded to appropriately and people were given information on how to make a complaint.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 September 2015

The service was well-led. People using the service, visitors and staff told us the registered manager was a good leader and had high standards.

Audits were carried out to make sure the systems that were in place were working as they should be. People using the service, relatives, staff and visiting professionals were asked for their views about the service and for any improvements they thought could be made.