Background to this inspection
Updated
19 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 08 December 2015 and was unannounced. There were eleven people at the home on the day of our visit
Before our inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications. Notifications are information about specific important events that the service is legally required to send to us.
The inspection team consisted of two inspectors. During the inspection we spoke with 7 people who used the service. We also spoke with five members of staff, and the registered manager.
We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us
We looked at three people’s care records. We observed care and support. We also looked at records that related to how the service was managed.
Updated
19 January 2016
The inspection took place on 08 December 2015 and was unannounced. The service was last inspected in April 2013 and met with legal requirements.
Englishcombe House is a care home that is registered to provide personal care for up to 20 people. There were 13 people at the home on the day of our visit.
There was a registered manager for the service. 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.
We found that one staff member only had a Criminal Records Bureau Check carried out seven months after they had started employment. This meant there was a lack of assurance for that period that the staff member was suitable.
One person had been assessed as not having mental capacity in relation to receiving help with personal care. Their care plan explained that ‘gentle restraint’ might be needed to assist the person safely to bathe. However, there was no restraint policy and guidance in place to help staff to follow the persons care plan safely.
We have made a recommendation about the safe use of restraint.
People said they always felt safe there and that staff treated them properly. Where risks to people were identified suitable actions were put in place to reduce the likelihood of them reoccurring. Staff had been on training to help them to understand what it was and how to report concerns.
People were assisted by enough staff to provide them with safe care. Staffing numbers were increased when it was needed. For example, when people’s needs changed due to being physically unwell.
Staff were caring in their manner with people when they assisted them with their needs. One person said “They are lovely”. Staff were polite and showed respect to the people they supported people.
People were provided with a varied diet that supported them to be healthy. The menus included likes and preferences of people who lived at the home. People spoke highly of the food that they were served . One person said, “It’s lovely food”.
The provider had a system in place so that the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were implemented when needed. This legislation protects the rights of people who lack capacity to make informed decisions In relation to different aspects of their lives.
People were able to take part in a variety of individual social activities as well as group ones. People told us that entertainers performed at the home regularly and they went out for trips into the local area.
People’s care plans explained how to meet their care and support needs. If people wanted to, they were involved in the planning and writing of their care plans. This was to help ensure that people were supported in the way they preferred.
People were supported with their physical health care needs and the staff consulted with external healthcare professionals to get specialist advice and guidance when required.
Staff felt they were properly supported in their work. People who lived at the home and the staff said they felt they could see the registered manager any time that they wanted to talk to them.
Staff had a good understanding of the providers visions and values. They were able to explain that a key value was to treat people as if they were still living in their own home .
There was a system in place to check and improve the quality of the service. Audits demonstrated that regular checks were undertaken on the safety and quality of the service.