Archived: Charnwood Park Residential Home

Updated 18 February 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.

The inspection took place on 7 January 2016. It was an unannounced inspection.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an Expert by Experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed notifications that we had received from the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We contacted the local authority who had funding responsibility for some of the people who were using the service.

We spoke with six people who used the service. We also spoke with a visiting health professional and three visitors during our inspection.

We spoke with the registered manager and three care workers. We looked at the care records of two people who used the service and other documentation about how the home was managed. This included policies and procedures, medication records, staff records, training records, staff rota and records associated with quality assurance processes.

Updated 18 February 2016

We inspected the service on 7 January 2016

Charnwood Park Residential Home provides accommodation for up to 11 older people with physical difficulties and sensory impairments. There were 11 people using the service on the day of our inspection.

There was a registered manager. 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.

People were protected from harm. People told us they felt safe and that there were enough staff available to meet their needs. There was a recruitment policy in place which the registered manager followed. We found that all the required pre-employment checks were being carried out before staff were to commence work.

Risks were assessed and managed to protect people from harm. Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people who used the service. People received their medicines as required and medicines were managed and administered safely.

People’s independence was promoted and staff encouraged people to make independent choices.. People remained part of the wider community if they wished to and they were supported to maintain links with people important to them.

People were supported to make decisions about the care they received. People’s opinions were sought and respected. The provider had considered their responsibility to meet the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was clear of their role in ensuring best interest decisions were made for people.

The registered manager had assessed the care needs of people using the service. Staff had a clear understanding of their role and how to support people who used the service as individuals.

Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and compassion. People enjoyed the meals provided and where they had dietary requirements, these were met. People were offered adequate drinks to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Systems were in place to monitor the health and wellbeing of people who used the service. People’s health needs were met and when necessary, outside health professionals were contacted for support.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager. The registered manager supervised staff and regularly checked their competency to carry out their role. People who used the service felt they could talk to the registered manager and had faith that they would address issues if required. Relatives found the registered manager to be approachable.