We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Airedale Nursing Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The Airedale Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
There were several areas in the garden where people could have socially distanced visits with their relatives by appointment. A room was being turned into an area where people’s visitors could have socially distanced visits in-doors during the winter months. People’s visitors would not walk through the service and had a separate entrance and exit and parking area.
People, when needed were asked to self-isolate within their room or within certain zoned off areas of the service. The ground floor currently had an area of three separate isolation rooms, separated by a door, from the rest of the building.
Staff were not allowed to travel to and from work in their uniforms.
There were policies and procedures in place around infection prevention and control. These included a COVID-19 action plan and the completion of an NHS Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) Assurance Framework for Care Homes.
There were two IPC leads at the service to support staff.
An extensive IPC audit had been completed at the service to monitor the quality of service and that up to date guidance and legislation was being followed by staff.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The Airedale Nursing Home is a care home providing personal and nursing care to 50 people on the day of the inspection. The service can support up to 57 people in a building made up of two units across three floors. One wing has been adapted and one wing is purpose built.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt the care and support they received at The Airedale Nursing Home was safe and that staff understood their needs well.
Risks to people were identified and monitored. Clear guidance was in place for staff on how to support people with these risks.
Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people from harm and how to report their concerns internally and externally to local safeguarding authorities.
Medicines were managed safely, and staff worked with other healthcare professionals to meet people’s health related needs.
Staff treated people kindly and there was a friendly atmosphere in the home. People`s personal information was kept confidential and their dignity and privacy was promoted and respected by staff.
There were enough staff to meet people`s needs. Staff had regular supervision and training specific to people’s needs.
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 had enough to eat and drink and told us they enjoyed their meals.
People and their relatives were involved in discussions about their care.
People experienced personalised care, which supported them to feel valued, and well cared for.
The activities coordinators and volunteers worked hard along with care staff to identify ways to provide a range of activities and occupations that appealed to all.
The provider’s governance systems and processes were effective and supported the registered manager to drive continuous improvements.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good with a rating of ‘Requires Improvement’ in the key question ‘Safe’ (published March 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.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall although, we identified some areas for improvement as follows:
Risks were managed so that people’s freedom, choice and control was not restricted more than necessary. However, staff had not followed one person’s care plan on the day of the inspection, which had placed them at possible harm of developing a pressure ulcer. After the inspection the registered managers provided evidence that they had taken swift action to ensure identified risks were managed in a more consistent way in future.
Systems were in place to ensure people’s daily medicines were managed in a safe way. People were also enabled to maintain their independence through managing their own medication as far as possible. However, this arrangement had not been risk assessed or recorded in another person’s care plan; placing them at possible risk of not receiving their medication in a safe way or as prescribed. Again, the registered managers confirmed they were taking action to ensure safe processes were followed for people wishing to take their own medication in future.
Staff understood how to protect people from avoidable harm and abuse, and the service managed incidents and safeguarding concerns promptly; demonstrating an open approach.
There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their needs, and the provider carried out checks on new staff to make sure they were suitable to work at the service.
People were supported to have their needs and individual preferences met by staff that had the necessary skills and knowledge. Staff ensured that the care and treatment provided was a sought in line with current legislation and guidance.
People had enough to eat and drink and were supported to maintain good health through access to relevant healthcare services.
Staff were caring and provided responsive care, support and treatment in a meaningful way; whilst promoting people’s privacy and dignity. They encouraged people to be as actively involved in making decisions about their care and to retain their independence as far as possible.
People were encouraged to take part in social activities and maintain relationships with people that mattered to them.
We saw that people’s concerns and complaints were encouraged and used as an opportunity for learning, in terms of improving the service provided.
The service demonstrated good management and leadership. There were two registered managers in post who worked effectively to promote a positive culture that was person centred, open and inclusive. Effective systems were also in place to monitor and deliver high quality in terms of service provision.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 9 January 2015 and was unannounced.
The Airedale Nursing Home is a care home registered to provide accommodation for people who require nursing or personal care. The home provides a service for up to 57 people who may have a range of care needs including dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. There were 46 people using the service at the time of this inspection.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
We found that staff had been trained to recognise signs of potential abuse and keep people safe. People we spoke with confirmed they felt safe living in the home.
Processes were in place to manage identifiable risks within the service and ensure people did not have their freedom unnecessarily restricted.
There were sufficient numbers of staff who had the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs, and we saw that the provider carried out proper recruitment checks on new staff to make sure they were suitable to work at the home.
Systems were in place to ensure people’s medicines were managed in a safe way and that they got their medication when they needed it.
Staff had received training to carry out their roles, including support to achieve national health and social care qualifications.
We found that the service worked to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 key principles, which state that a person's capacity should always be assumed, and assessments of capacity must be undertaken where it is believed that a person cannot make decisions about their care and support.
People had enough to eat and drink. Assistance was provided to those who needed help with eating and drinking, in a discreet and helpful manner.
The home had developed positive working relationships with external healthcare professionals to ensure effective arrangements were in place to meet people’s healthcare needs.
Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way and people were treated with kindness and compassion. People’s privacy and dignity was respected at all times.
We saw that people were given regular opportunities to express their views on the service they received and to be actively involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
People’s social needs were provided for. We saw people actively participating in and enjoying activities that had been arranged on the day of the inspection.
A complaints procedure had been developed to let people know how to raise concerns about the service if they needed to.
Systems were also in place to monitor the quality of the service provided including satisfaction surveys, meetings and internal audits. We saw that action had been taken to address concerns that had been received and improvements that had been identified, as a result of internal audits and feedback from people using the service.
People told us they were happy living in The Airedale Nursing Home. They said they felt well cared for and confirmed that they had agreed to the care and treatment provided to them.
People's social needs were being met too. We observed lots of activities taking place, which people said happened regularly. One person living in the home told us: 'I have no complaints, they couldn't do any better.'
Overall people told us they liked the food and had enough to eat and drink. One person said 'if I don't like something I can ask for something else.'
We found that people using the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the staff had the right skills and knowledge to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent it from happening.
Systems were also in place to monitor the quality of the service provided, and ensure people had their views listened to.
Records provided a clear audit trail of the recruitment and selection procedures in place, including systems for ensuring that staff were legally entitled to work in the UK.
We observed staff treating people with consideration and respect, and people that we spoke with told us they were happy living in the home. One person told us 'it's really very, very good here.'
People told us that they felt well cared for, the staff were friendly and helpful, and the care they received was appropriate for their individual needs. Another person said 'nothing is too much trouble', and told us that their quality of life had improved since moving into the home. Everyone was complementary about the food provided and the choices available.
We found that people were protected against risks from unsafe or inappropriate equipment because there were enough staff who had received the right training. However, we found some people had been left without a call bell within their reach. The manager took action to remedy this whilst we were there and said that she would remind staff of the importance of ensuring that people always have the means to summon assistance in an emergency or otherwise.
We spoke with five people using the service, and observed the care and support provided to them and six other people. We also spoke with the relatives of two people and three members of staff.
One person told us that they had been involved in a thorough assessment process prior to their relative moving into the home. They said that their relative received the care and support that they expected, and that staff kept them up to date and informed. We were also told that the activities provided by the home were "marvellous", and that friends and families were made to feel welcome.
One person's relative commented that there seemed to be high levels of staff turnover, so staffing sometimes lacked consistency. However, they added that the staff were nice people.
We observed some positive interaction between staff and people using the service, which showed that staff understood the needs of the people they were supporting and how best to communicate with them.