You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

Bethel Place is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Bethel Place is a small service that accommodates one person in an adapted building.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associate Regulations about how the service is run.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. We found the provider was following the MCA code of practice.

People were safe because staff supported them to understand how to keep safe and staff knew how to manage risk effectively. There were sufficient numbers of care staff on shift with the correct skills and knowledge to keep people safe. There were appropriate arrangements in place for medicines to be stored and administered safely.

Staff had good relationships with people who used the service and were attentive to their needs. People’s privacy and dignity was respected at all times. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support.

Care plans were person centred and contained information about how people preferred to communicate and their ability to make decisions.

People were encouraged to take part in activities that they enjoyed, and were supported to keep in contact with family members. When needed, they were supported to see health professionals and referrals were put through to ensure they had the appropriate care and treatment.

Relatives and staff were complimentary about the management of the service. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in providing safe and good quality care to the people who used the service.

The management team had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was safe.

The provider had systems in place to manage risks. Staff understood how to recognise, respond to and report abuse or any concerns they had about safe care practices.

Staff were only employed after all essential pre-employment checks had been satisfactorily completed.

There were systems in place to manage people�s medicines safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received regular supervision and training relevant to their roles.

Staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and how this Act applied to the people they cared for.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to help them maintain a healthy balanced diet.

People had access to healthcare professionals when they required them.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was caring.

Staff had developed positive caring relationships with the people they supported.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and their families were appropriately involved.

Staff respected and took account of people�s individual needs and preferences.

People had privacy and dignity respected and were supported to maintain their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were detailed and provided guidance for staff to meet people�s individual needs.

There was an effective complaints policy and procedure in place which enabled people to raise complaints and the outcomes were used to improve the service.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was well-led.

There was an open culture at the service. The management team were approachable and a visible presence in the service.

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and were encouraged and supported by the manager and their deputy.

The service had an effective quality assurance system. The quality of the service provided was monitored regularly and people were asked for their views.