Archived: Summerville Care Home

Updated 8 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 over two days. The first day was on 6 October 2015 and was unannounced. The second day was on the 25 November 2015, the provider was told that we would be returning for a second day of inspection.

The inspection team was made up of two adult social care inspectors on both of the days.

As part of our inspection planning we reviewed the information that we held about the home. This included information from the provider, reviewing the latest local authority monitoring report, as well as statutory notifications. Statutory notifications include important events and occurrences which the provider is required to send to us by law. Before the inspection visit the provider sent us 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.

During the inspection we spoke with 12 people who lived at the home, one relative and one visiting health professional. We also spoke with staff including the registered manager, the administrator, the clinical lead, the quality manager, five care assistants, one nurse, one housekeeper and the activities co-ordinator.

We reviewed four people’s care records and reviewed other documentation related to the day to day management of the service including four staff files, staff rotas, quality audits, meeting minutes, training records, call bell response times and maintenance records. We looked around the home, including bathrooms, store rooms and with permission spoke with some people in their bedrooms. Throughout the inspection we made observations of care and support provided to people in the communal areas and observed how people were supported over lunchtime. We also spoke with people taking part in activities in the smaller lounge.

Updated 8 February 2016

We carried out an inspection over a period of two days 6 October 2015 and 25 November 2105. The first day of the inspection was unannounced and the second day took place to gather additional information.

On the first day there were 38 people who used the service and 41people on the second day. Summerville Nursing Centre was last inspected on 25 June 2013 and was found to be compliant with all the regulations that were inspected.

Summerville Nursing Centre is a care home registered to provide care and treatment for a maximum of 45 people requiring nursing care. The care home is based in a residential area, on the outskirts of Stockton Heath. The two storey property is a large converted house. Bedrooms are based over two floors and there is a smaller upstairs unit where there are bedrooms with ensuite bathrooms. There are two lounges and a dining area on the ground floor. The home is a short distance away from local amenities.

Summerville has 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.

We saw that people were well cared for and very comfortable in the home. The people and visitors that we spoke with were very complimentary about the care that they received and told us that the staff were kind and caring. We observed that staff were skilled and patient, treating people with dignity and respect

People felt safe and told us that they received the support that they needed, in a way that respected their wishes. We found that there was a stable staff team who worked hard, ensuring that they supported people in a thorough and unrushed way. However at times people had to wait if they needed two members of staff to assist them, as another member of staff may not be available if assisting elsewhere. This was especially the case during the morning. The registered manager assured us that she would review the staffing levels and deployment of staff during these times.

Staff received regular training and supervision, although not all staff had received a minimum of four supervision sessions per year. The registered manager was aware of this and had plans to address the frequency of these in the future.

Care records were personalised and up to date, they reflected the support that people needed so that staff could understand how to care for the person appropriately. We saw that staff responded to people’s changing needs and sought involvement from outside health professionals as required. The GP visited the home every week to review people’s health needs on a regular basis.

People had access to activities both within the home and local community. We could see that the activities coordinator was a real asset to the home, one person told us that she was “excellent”. A full activities and entertainment programme was available to all residents, as well as one to one support for people who stayed in their bedrooms.

The home was well-led, with  robust quality assurance processes in place.