Archived: Manor 1 Also known as The Manor Care Home Ltd

Manor 1 is a residential home that provides care for up to 16 older people some of whom may be living with dementia. There were 15 people using the service when we visited.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

People and their relatives told us they did not think there were enough staff. We have made a recommendation about staffing levels for the weekend.

The experiences of people who lived at the home were positive. People told us they felt safe living at the home, staff were kind and the care they received was good. We found staff had a good understanding of their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults.

People’s needs were assessed and their preferences identified as much as possible across all aspects of their care. Risks were identified and plans in place to monitor and reduce risks. People had access to relevant health professionals when they needed them. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Staff undertook training and received regular supervision to help support them to provide effective care. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS is law protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests.

People had mixed views about the food. We saw people were able to choose what they ate and drank. People had access to health care professionals as appropriate. People had opportunities to engage in a range of social events and activities. However people who could not leave their room told us they wanted more stimulation.

People’s needs were met in a personalised manner. We found that care plans were in place which included information about how to meet a person’s individual and assessed needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place.

There was a clear management structure in the home. People who lived at the home, relatives and staff felt comfortable about sharing their views and talking to the registered manager if they had any concerns. Staff told us the registered manager was always supportive.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

Risk assessments were in place which included information about how to support people in a safe manner. The service carried out various health and safety audits, for example in relation to fire alarm testing and medication audits. We found that medication was stored and administered safely.

The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff have been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We spoke with people who used the service. They told us they were happy with the care and support provided. One person told us 'staff read out my care plan to me." Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the individual needs of people.

Is the service caring?

People's views and experiences were taking into account and this informed how their care was delivered. People told us that they were involved and consulted about decisions affecting their care and treatment. One person said 'I have a care plan and I have a say in it." People explained that they had been involved in decisions regarding their medication and their future care needs. Care records showed that people had been involved and consulted about their care.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs were assessed and support was delivered to meet their individual needs. We looked at five care files. These provided information about people's needs. Care plans gave guidance for staff about how they should meet people's needs. Care plans clearly identified people's needs resulting from their diverse cultural backgrounds.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager in place and a clear management structure. Staff we spoke with said they found management staff to be approachable. Clear records were maintained which were stored securely. Quality assurance and monitoring processes were in place.

During our inspection of the service in August 2013 we found the provider had a system in place to support staff in their roles and responsibilities. There was documentary evidence staff had received a yearly appraisal and a supervision since our last inspection. This showed people were cared for by staff who were receiving appropriate supervisions and appraisals from their management.

People we spoke with told us they received good care. One person told us "I like it alright, I am accustomed to being here." However we found people's care and treatment had not been regularly reviewed.

We found people who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. People we spoke with told us they felt safe. At our last inspection on July 2012 we found the design and layout of the main lounge was not suitable for people's needs. We found at this inspection the layout of the maintain lounge area had improved.

People told us staff were good. One person told us staff were "very good." We found staff received appropriate professional development. However staff did not receive a regular supervision or appraisals.

People who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. We found people's personal records including medical records were accurate and fit for purpose.