You are here

Crawshaw Hall Medical Centre and Nursing Home Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at Crawshaw Hall Medical Centre and Nursing Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.
All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 28 May 2014
Date of Publication: 24 June 2014
Inspection Report published 24 June 2014 PDF | 95.2 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 28 May 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask:

• Is the service safe?

• Is the service effective?

• Is the service caring?

• Is the service responsive?

• Is the service well led?

This a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

The manager told us there were two Deprivation of Liberties Safeguards (DoLS) in place at the home. We saw up to date documentation relating to DoLS in place and had been signed and dated appropriately in one file. However documentation relating to DoLS in the second file we looked at was out of date. There was no record of action for review seen.

There was evidence of care planning in place for two of the four care files we looked at. However we saw out of date care planning in one file in relation to DoLS and no care plan in relation to the second DoLS. This meant staff did not have access to upto date information in relation to the specific care need of people living in the home.

We saw risk assessments were in place and had been updated in the care files we looked at.

We looked at the duty rota and saw appropriate numbers of staff were in place to care for people living in the home. We were told the home very rarely used agency staff to cover sickness or holidays. This meant people living in the home received care from a regular and knowledgeable staff team.

Is the service effective?

We were shown an activity folder. There were details of people likes and dislikes and preferred activities in this. We saw evidence of activities taking place. A relative told us there had been a garden party the previous week, which people had enjoyed.

We looked at two training files in the home. We saw evidence that some training had taken place for example, person centred care, dignity in care and pressure ulcers. However not all staff had undertaken all training in the last year. An example seen was, only three staff members had completed training in dignity in care. The manager told us they would rectify this as soon as able.

There were copies of thank you cards on display in the link corridor to both units. An example comment was, ‘On behalf of (Named person) family I would just like to thank you for the caring and professional way you looked after (Name person)’.

Is the service caring?

We undertook a short observation framework for inspection during the lunch time period in one of the lounges. We observed staff engaged in little meaningful conversation with the people they were assisting. People who used the service were not informed of meal choices of drinks they were offered.

We looked around the home and in both units. The bedroom we looked at had been personalised with personal items and mementos.

We spoke with people living in the home who told us, “I feel safe and cared for. They (staff) take us out and they do things. I feel involved in decisions about my care”, “I am very happy here. If I ring my buzzer the staff come”, “I am happy with my care the staff are fine” and, “I am well cared for and happy”.

Is the service responsive?

We saw evidence of team meetings were taking place and staff we spoke with told us they attended the meetings and were able to voice their views.

There was evidence of resident and relative meetings taking place. Relatives we spoke with confirmed they were able to attend these and minutes. They were also sent copies of minutes to their home. This meant they were kept informed about the operation of the service.

Is the service well led?

There are two registered managers at the location, one based in the medical centre the other based in the nursing home. We spoke with the operations director on the day of our inspection. We were told he takes an active part in the running of the home and is visible in the home.

We asked for feedback about the managers and operations director from members of staff and people who live at the home. We were told, “(Named operations director and manager) are easy to approach with any concerns”, “(Named operation director) is brilliant” and, “(Named operation director) and the manager are very supportive, they are their all the time”.

We saw evidence of staff meetings taking place, with notes and topics discussed. This meant people living in the home were cared for by and updated and informed staff team

We asked about how they monitored the quality of service provision. We were shown evidence of audits taking place on, care plans, falls and medications. Action plans had been developed to address any shortfalls. We saw the audits had been completed recently and there was evidence of previous audits taking place.

We asked about staff supervision. We were shown a supervision file for the staff working in the medical centre. We saw evidence that supervision had taken place recently and there were notes on topics that had been covered. We noted however supervision prior to this had not been undertaken for some time for example one person’s file noted that the last supervision prior to April 2014 was October 2013. This is important to ensure staff have the opportunity to discuss their experiences of working in the home and identify any future training needs.