You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

This inspection took place on 27 April 2018 and was unannounced. This was a first ratings inspection.

Pear tree lane 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. Pear tree lane accommodates up to 13 people in three adapted buildings. At the time of the inspection there were 13 people living in the care home.

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.

People were protected from abuse. Risks were assessed and managed to keep people safe. Premises and equipment were maintained to minimise the risk of infection. People were supported by sufficient safely recruited staff. Medicines were managed safely. The registered manager had systems in place to learn when things went wrong.

People’s needs were assessed and they had effective care plans in place. Staff received training to meet people’s needs and supported people consistently. People were able to choose what they had to eat and drink and were supported safely. The environment was adapted to meet the needs of people. People had support to maintain their health and wellbeing. 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.

People were supported by staff that were kind and caring and had good relationships with people. People had their communication needs assessed and care plans were in place which supported people to make choices and retain their independence. People were treated with dignity and respect.

People had their preferences understood by staff, assessments of their diverse needs were carried out and plans put in place to meet them. People had regular reviews of their needs and could take part in things which were of interest to them. People could make a complaint and there was a system in place to investigate these. People had their wishes for end of life care considered.

People and their relatives were asked for their feedback. We found systems in place to check on the quality of the service people received and the provider used information from these to make improvements. The registered manager had systems in place to monitor the delivery of people’s care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

The service was good.

People were supported by staff that protected them from abuse. People were supported to reduce risks to their safety and live in a clean environment. People were supported by enough staff who had been recruited safely. People were supported to receive their medicines as prescribed. Lessons were learned when things went wrong.

Effective

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

The service was good.

People had their needs assessed and care plans were in place. People were supported by trained staff and their care was delivered consistently. People had enough to eat and drink and their health needs were met. People had access to adaptations in the home and their rights were protected.

Caring

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

The service was good.

People were supported by caring staff. People were supported to communicate and make choices for themselves and were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity was maintained.

Responsive

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

The service was good.

People’s diverse needs and preferences were understood and observed by staff. People had support to follow their individual interests and they were able to make complaints. People had plans in place to support them at the end of their lives.

Well-led

Good

Updated 26 June 2018

The service was good.

The registered manager had systems in place to seek feedback from people. There were systems in place to monitor the consistency of the service. There were checks in place to ensure people had the care they needed and make improvements to the quality of the service.