Background to this inspection
Updated
11 February 2021
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.
This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.
This inspection took place on 14 January 2021 and was announced.
Updated
11 February 2021
What is life like using this service:
People told us they felt safe. People were protected from potential abuse and discrimination. Risks to people had been identified and action taken to reduce these. The home was kept clean and measures were in place to reduce risks of infection. Medicines were managed safely and people were given the support they needed to take their medicines. Enough suitably experienced and skilled staff were available to meet people’s needs. Staff were recruited safely.
On-going assessments of people’s needs ensured people’s physical, mental and social needs were understood. People had access to health and social care professionals to support these. People had a choice of food and were provided with the right type of food and drink to meet their health needs. Staff received relevant training to be able to meet people’s needs.
The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were applied. The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Decisions made on behalf of people were made in their best interests.
Staff were caring and compassionate. They communicated well with people which ensured people’s preferences and wishes were understood. People could receive visitors when they chose and the views of people’s representatives, where appropriate, were sought and valued. People’s diverse cultural and religious preferences were accepted and supported.
Care plans recorded people’s needs and gave guidance to staff on how these should be met. Changes to people’s care were made where people’s abilities, health or risks altered and staff were informed of these daily. Information about people’s care and treatment was kept secure and confidential.
Staff supported people to take part in social activities. They provided group and one to one activities, although people told us they would benefit from more activities and meaningful interactions. We have made a recommendation that the service review its current activity provision to ensure it is meeting people’s social needs. Community links provided access to, for example, support from local churches. There was a complaints procedure in place and easy access to managers, which ensured concerns and complaints could reported, investigated and resolved.
Staff were experienced in supporting people at the end of their life. Arrangements were in place to ensure people’s end of life wishes were met and a comfortable and dignified death was experienced.
The home had two registered managers. 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.
A home manager was also employed and collectively, the managers ensured the home ran in such a way which achieved good outcomes for people. Managers shared responsibility for monitoring the quality of the service provided. Audits and other internal checks were completed as part of a quality monitoring process. We were informed, by the registered managers, that actions were taken immediately to address necessary improvements to the service. A record of actions would provide a clear audit trail of how and when improvements to the service are planned and completed and how risks would be managed till improvements were made. We have made a recommendation about the recording of service improvement actions and plans.
All managers were aware of their responsibilities and met these, in relation to the care homes registration with the CQC and in relation to other relevant legislation.
Rating at last inspection:
The last inspection was in June 2016 when the service was rated as ‘Good’ overall. The service remains ‘Good’ overall.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
About the service:
Charnwood House is a care home which provides nursing care. It provides care and treatment to people with complex physical needs. Also to people who live with dementia and mental health needs. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service is registered to provide care to 35 people. At the time of the inspection 21 people lived there.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.