We inspected Gratwick House on the 18 October 2016. Gratwick House is a care home registered to provide support for older people who may have dementia and require personal care. The service is registered to support a maximum of 22 people. The service is located in Littlehampton, West Sussex in a residential area. There were 20 people living at the service on the day of our inspection. Gratwick House was last inspected in May 2014 and no concerns were identified.
A registered manager was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were happy and relaxed with staff. They said they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to support them. One person told us, “Yes, I do feel safe here”. Another said, “They usually they come quickly when I call”. When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked and references obtained. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding adults and what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place.
Medicines were managed safely and in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.
People were being supported to make decisions in their best interests. The registered manager and staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately and steps taken to minimise the risk of similar events happening in the future. Risks associated with the environment and equipment had been identified and managed. Emergency procedures were in place in the event of fire and people knew what to do, as did the staff.
Staff had received essential training and there were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, including caring for people with pressure damage (bed sores), and palliative care (end of life). Staff had received both one to one and group supervision meetings with their manager, and formal personal development plans, such as annual appraisals were in place. One member of staff told us, “Supervision is a good incentive to improve and discuss anything you are struggling with”. Another said, “Training is important, so we can get better at what we do for the residents. It’s all for the residents to make them happy”.
People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink well. There was a varied daily choice of meals and people were able to give feedback and have choice in what they ate and drank. One person told us, “The meals are very good, we are well fed. You can ask for anything and they will provide it”. Special dietary requirements were met, and people’s weight was monitored, with their permission. Health care was accessible for people and appointments were made for regular check-ups as needed.
People chose how to spend their day and they took part in activities in the service and the community. People told us they enjoyed the activities, which included singing, films, beauty treatments and themed events, such as reminiscence sessions. One person told us, “Yes, I do feel well looked after. We do have some entertainment and I choose what I like”. People were also encouraged to stay in touch with their families and receive visitors.
People felt well looked after and supported. We observed friendly and genuine relationships had developed between people and staff. One person told us, “I find the staff helpful and very friendly, none of them have been nasty. They are good, and I’m well looked after”. Care plans described people’s needs and preferences and they were encouraged to be as independent as possible.
People were encouraged to express their views and had completed surveys. Feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People also said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed. One person told us, “No, I’ve never needed to complain, but I would if needed”.
Staff were asked for their opinions on the service and whether they were happy in their work. They felt supported within their roles, describing an ‘open door’ management approach, where managers were always available to discuss suggestions and address problems or concerns. The provider undertook quality assurance reviews to measure and monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement.