We carried out a review of the data available to us about Cloyda Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Cloyda Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Cloyda Care Home is a care home that provides residential care for up to 35 older people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection there were 29 people using the service including those living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Some of the systems in place, such as ways of engaging with people and staff and the provider’s plans to develop and improve the service were informal. We have made a recommendation about this and will follow this up at the next planned inspection for the service.
People and their relatives told us that Cloyda Care Home was a safe place to live. The provider ensured people were kept as safe as possible through ensuring that staff understood what steps to take if people were at risk. Risks assessments were completed and reviewed and included ways in which staff could support people to take acceptable risks and enjoy their lives safely. Staff received training in safeguarding and knew who to report any concerns to. There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs and the provider operated robust recruitment checks which helped to ensure that they were safe to work with people. Medicines were administered safely by staff who had been trained to do so. There were systems in place to monitor any incidents and accidents that took place. Staff used Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) safely, effectively.
There was a warm, welcoming feel to the home, and we received positive feedback about how the home was run by the registered manager. There was an open, transparent culture in the service where people, relatives and staff felt that their views would be taken on board. A number of quality assurance audits took place which helped to ensure the management team continued to provide a good level of care. These included medicines, infection control, health and safety and other checks.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 7 November 2018). The overall rating for the service remains good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
We did not inspect the key questions of effective, caring and responsive.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Cloyda Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice:
At the time of our inspection, all of the people using the service were confined to their rooms due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Sufficient stocks of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) were available including masks, gloves, aprons, hand sanitiser and visors. We saw that staff were wearing this appropriately and records showed that they had received training in Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) and the use of PPE.
No visitors were being allowed into the service. Suitable arrangements had previously been put in place to help people maintain safe social contact with their family members and friends. A ground floor room had been allocated with a Perspex screened pod installed which allowed people living in the care home and their visitors to enter and leave separately whilst seeing each other safely.
Staff and people at the home were engaged in the ‘whole-home’ testing programme. People living in the home were routinely tested for COVID-19 every four weeks or as required with staff being tested once weekly. Rapid testing was in use due to the COVID-19 outbreak with all staff being tested at the start of their shift.
Regular cleaning was undertaken to minimise the risk of infection and fogging equipment purchased for disinfection. The age and layout of the home made social distancing more problematic but changes had been made to mitigate this. For example, reduction and positioning of the available lounge chairs.
The service regularly monitored and audited compliance with the infection prevention and control measures in place. We discussed making improvements to the audit processes in place to fully document the checks taking place.
The registered manager told us they had received good support from the GP, local authority and other external healthcare professionals during the pandemic. An external IPC professional visited the service on the day following our inspection. They reported that they were "extremely impressed" with everything the service had done to prevent the further spread of COVID-19.
The bedrooms are based on two floors and each floor has shared bathroom facilities. Eight bedrooms had their own toilet and all bedrooms had a small sink for washing. There are two lounges, one attached to a dining area and a small lounge, both overlooking a large garden. There are kitchen and laundry facilities on the ground floor. The home is close to local amenities including shops, cafes, and churches and had good transport links to the local towns and London.
At our inspection in November 2015 we rated the service as Good overall and Well-Led as Requires Improvement, with one breach of regulations because the provider did not have effective systems to assess, monitor, and improve the quality of the services provided.
We inspected against this breach of regulation in March 2016 and although the provider had met the breach we did not change the rating for Well-Led because to do so would require consistent good practice.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good and we changed the rating of Well-Led from Requires Improvement to Good. The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
People remained safe at the home. People had suitable risk assessments in place. The provider managed risks associated with the premises and equipment well. There were enough staff at the home to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices remained safe. Medicines continued to be administered safely. The checks we made confirmed that people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by staff qualified to administer medicines.
People continued to be supported by staff who received appropriate training and support. Staff had the skills, experience and a good understanding of how to meet people’s needs. We saw that staff encouraged people to make their own decisions and gave them the encouragement, time and support to do so. Staff were providing support in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. People had access to a range of healthcare professionals.
The staff were caring. The atmosphere in the home was calm and friendly. Staff took their time and gave people encouragement whilst supporting them. Throughout the inspection we saw that people had the privacy they needed and were treated with dignity and respect by staff.
People’s needs were assessed before they stayed at the home and support was planned and delivered in response to their needs. People could choose the activities they liked to do. The provider had arrangements in place to respond appropriately to people’s concerns and complaints.
We observed during our visit that management were approachable and responsive to staff and people’s needs. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. Audits of the premises helped ensure the premises and people were kept safe.
After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to this breach of regulation.
We undertook a focused inspection on the 31 March 2016 to check that they had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This inspection was unannounced.
This report only covers our findings in relation to these requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Cloyda Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk
Cloyda Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 35 older people, many of whom are living with dementia.
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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
During our focused inspection we found the provider had followed their action plan. We saw legal requirements had been met as the provider now had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. New policies and procedures had been written and the provider was taking action to ensure they were being effectively followed.
Although sufficient action has been taken to meet the legal requirements made at the last inspection, we have not changed the ratings for ‘well-led’ from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ as we need to see changes made have been consistently embedded by the provider over time. The overall rating for the service remains as ‘good’.
The inspection took place on the 17 November 2015 and was unannounced. The last inspection of this service was on the 9 December 2013. At that inspection we found the service was meeting all the regulations we assessed.
Cloyda Care Home provides personal care for older people many of whom are living with dementia. It can provide accommodation for up to 35 people over two floors. At the time of our inspection 29 people were living at the home.
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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The service had a number of measures in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, these measures were ineffective in some areas. This included the storage of medicines, infection control and the continued suitability of people employed by the service.
This is a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the back of this report.
People and their relatives were positive about the care and support they received at Cloyda. We saw staff were knowledgeable about people and knew how to meet their diverse needs. We saw genuine warmth from staff towards people who used the service. Levels of staffing were sufficient to ensure people’s needs were met.
We observed people were routinely asked for their consent before care was provided. If people were unable to give informed consent, the provider worked within the framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The Act aims to protect people who may not be able to make some decisions for themselves and to make sure their rights are protected.
There were a range of social activities people could chose to participate in if they wished to. Relatives were encouraged to visit the home and to maintain contact with their family members.
People’s care needs were well documented. They reflected individual needs and preferences, and were reviewed regularly so they were up to date in order to meet people’s current needs. People had access to professionals that would enable them to stay as healthy as possible.
Staff were knowledgeable about people they cared for. Care plans outlined clearly how care should be provided and these plans were regularly updated. Staff received regular training and support to ensure the care they provided remained in line with current good practice.
The registered manager was open and inclusive. They encouraged people to share their views of the service, and they had put a number of mechanisms in place so people could respond in a different ways. People felt their views and concerns would be listened to and acted upon.
People were encouraged to maintain good health. They had access to healthcare professionals. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and monitored and people received a variety of meals according to their needs and choice. People received their medicines as they were prescribed by their GP.
The aim of the visit was to see if improvements had been made in relation to the level of care provided and staffing numbers following our inspection in April 2013.
We saw through observation that there was an increased level of staff during the morning and over lunch. A member of staff was based in the lounge/dining room area to provide support if required. The manager would also provide additional support during lunch and other busy times.
Since our previous visit staff had received good practice guidance on personal hygiene, dignity, respect and communication. This information was also displayed around the home.
Staff we spoke with said "The staffing levels are OK as before we were a bit pushed", "There is definitely enough support from the managers" and "I really look forward to coming to work every day".
People we spoke with said they felt safe and they thought the staff were very nice. One person said "The staff are always smiling and happy to help you".
The people who use the service that we spoke with all thought the staff were very nice and happy. One person commented that the staff had a laugh with the residents. The relatives we spoke with felt the staff were welcoming, helpful and kind.
The staff we spoke with felt there were not enough people on duty to provide the care and support required by the people using the service. They did comment that they thought the training they had received was good and if they could ask for additional training if they felt they needed it.
People said the home was very clean and one relative explained that they visited at different times of the day and there were always high levels of cleanliness. The people we spoke to told us the food was nice and nutritious with one person who used the service saying 'I get to eat ice cream for every pudding".
A relative commented that "What matters is not how posh the home is, it's the people who work there that is important".
The inspection team was lead by a CQC inspector joined by an Expert by Experience, people who have experience of using services and who can provide that perspective.
People said they enjoyed living in the home and the staff were very supportive. They said that they felt the food was of a very high quality and that they were given a selection of meals to eat. We were told that staff were supportive and that there was a very warm family atmosphere in the home. One person said, 'the carers are lovely and we are very lucky to live here'. Another person told us, 'I'm very happy here.'
All the residents looked happy and well cared for and the atmosphere within the home was very cheerful with lots of interaction between them and the staff.