Background to this inspection
Updated
29 January 2016
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 18 and 21 December 2015. It was conducted by one inspector and was unannounced.
Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed previous inspection reports and notifications we had been sent by the provider. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.
We spoke with nine people living at the home, two family members, two visiting doctors and a visiting community nurse. We also spoke with the provider’s representative, the registered manager, the deputy manager, the head of care, four care staff, a member of kitchen staff and a staff member responsible for arranging social activities.
We looked at care plans and associated records for five people and records relating to the management of the service. These included staff duty records, staff recruitment files, records of complaints, accidents and incidents, and quality assurance records. We also observed care and support being delivered in communal areas.
The home was last inspected on 22 November 2013, when we identified no concerns.
Updated
29 January 2016
This inspection took place on 18 and 21 December 2015 and was unannounced. The home provides accommodation for up to 23 people, including some people living with dementia care needs. There were 21 people living at the home when we visited.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.
Staff followed the principles of legislation designed to protect people’s rights and liberties. They sought verbal consent from people before providing care and support.
Individual risks to people were managed safely and effective action was taken to reduce the level of risk. When people had experienced falls, senior staff reviewed the risks to reduce the likelihood of further falls.
Most people received personalised care from staff who understood and met their needs. However, some care records did not reflect people’s changing needs. We pointed this out to the registered manager who took immediate action to address this. Care plans provided comprehensive information about the way in which people wished to receive care and support. Staff knew people well, recognised when their needs changed and responded promptly.
People told us they felt safe at the home. Staff knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse, and the provider responded appropriately to allegations of abuse. Clear systems were in place for managing medicines and stock levels tallied with the medicine administration records in all but one case.
People were cared for with kindness and consideration. Staff showed exceptional commitment to supporting people to attend events. They formed supportive relationships with people and promoted choice at every opportunity. Arrangements had been made for people to continue to practise their faith and the home hosted meetings of a local community group.
People’s privacy was protected and they were encouraged to remain as independent as possible. They were involved in planning and agreeing the care and support they received and staff encouraged them to make choices about every aspect of their lives.
Staffing arrangements were robust and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs at all times. Staff were suitably trained and most staff had obtained vocational qualifications or were working towards these. They were supported appropriately in their work and felt valued. The process used to recruit staff helped make sure that only suitable people were employed.
People praised the quality and choice of food and were involved in designing the menus. When people were at risk of not eating or drinking enough, staff provided appropriate support and monitored people’s intake effectively.
People saw doctors or nurses when needed and staff enjoyed good working relationships with healthcare professionals, who praised the quality of care delivered. Staff accompanied people to medical appointments to help make sure their needs were communicated effectively.
A wide range of activities was available to people. These had been tailored to meet people’s individual interests and included trips to local attractions in the home’s minibus.
The provider maintained a high level of communication with people through a range of newsletters and meetings. They consulted people about all aspects of the service and acted on their feedback. There was an appropriate complaints policy in place; complaints were investigated thoroughly and responded to promptly.
The provider took pride in creating a homely, personal environment; staff shared this vision and were committed to maintaining a relaxed atmosphere. People liked living at the home and felt it was well-led.
There was a clear management structure in place; staff enjoyed working at the home, were motivated and operated well as a team. There were clear systems in place to communicate information between staff and they were encouraged to make suggestions for improvements.
The home had an open and transparent culture. Visitors were welcomed and there were strong links with the local community. A range of audits was conducted to assess, monitor and improve the quality of service.