You are here

Archived: Newlands Hall

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 4 September 2014
Date of Publication: 15 November 2014
Inspection Report published 15 November 2014 PDF | 115.55 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 4 September 2014

During a routine inspection

Silverline Care Limited is registered as the provider for Newlands Hall. At the time of this inspection the day to day management responsibilities were discharged to Orchard Care Homes Limited through a Management Agreement. The inspection visit was carried out by two inspectors over one day. During the inspection, we spoke with the manager, a compliance officer from the management company, two senior care assistants, four care assistants, five people who lived at the home and four visitors who were relatives or friends. The inspectors also looked around the premises, observed staff interactions with people who lived at the home, and looked at records.

The person named as manager of the service in this report is no longer in post.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected.

We used the information to answer the five key 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 is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in an environment that was not clean and hygienic. We found people may not be protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had not been followed.

There were some issues relating to safety of the building. This included an open door to concrete steps leading to the laundry.

There were issues with how staff organised their time to meet the care needs of people living at the home.

One visitor who was a person’s relative told us that people who lived at the home were not safe because staff were not always available in communal areas. The visitor said they had needed to intervene to support people when staff were not around.

Safeguarding referrals had not been made as needed.

We made a safeguarding referral in respect of one person whose healthcare needs were not being met and who was at risk of serious illness.

Records were not kept securely, were not well maintained and were not sufficient to support the delivery of care.

Is the service effective?

We looked at five people’s care records and found them difficult to use. We could not easily find up to date information within the records to inform staff of the support people needed to meet their needs.

Menus showed the meals provided at the home offered people a healthy, nutritionally balanced diet but people had limited choice. We also saw there were some people living at the home who required assistance from staff to eat their meals and have an adequate fluid intake. Staff did not support people appropriately in this. This meant people were not protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration.

We saw that some people did not have their health care needs met.

Is the service caring?

Two people who lived at the home told us that were good and they gave them help when they needed it. Two visitors told us they were generally happy with the care their relatives received.

Two of the visitors we spoke with told us they were concerned about their relative and other people who lived at the home.

The care assistants we spoke with told us they felt there were enough of them to meet people’s needs.

When we looked around the home we saw some people’s bedrooms were not clean or appropriately furbished.

Care staff did not always respond in a caring manner to people who lived at the home. For example, a person who asked for their walking frame was told they could have it when they had finished their lunch.

Is the service responsive?

Two of the visitors we spoke with told us that staff had not responded appropriately to concerns or queries they had raised.

Some people who lived at the home did not have their needs clearly identified within care records and we saw some people did not have their needs in relation to their healthcare met.

Is the service well-led?

There had been four different managers at the service within the previous seven months. The current manager had been in post for several weeks. The manager was not aware of the care needs of the people who lived at the home. For example, the manager told us none of the people living at the home were living with dementia. We found several people either had a diagnosis or were displaying symptoms of dementia.

The manager was not aware of their responsibilities regarding the people who lived in the flats situated in the grounds of the home.

Issues relating to quality had not been identified during auditing of the home by the company’s senior personnel.