Archived: Dimensions Nicholas House

This is a summary of what we found:

On the day of our inspection there were four people using the service including one person who was on holidays. Due to their learning disability, people were unable to communicate fully with us. Two people were able to express their satisfaction with the care and support they received.

Is the service safe?

We found that people's care needs had been assessed and met appropriately to ensure their safety and wellbeing. Risk assessments had been carried out and reviewed to reflect any changes to the needs of people who used the service.

There were systems in place for the safe management and administration of medicines so that people received their medicines regularly and on time.

We noted from the duty rotas that there were sufficient numbers of staff rostered on duty to meet the needs of people. The staff members we spoke with said that the use of regular agency staff provided cover for staff shortage.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. No applications had been submitted under this system. The manager stated that they were aware of the process for making a DoLS application when required.

Is the service effective?

People we spoke with expressed their satisfaction with the care and support they received. Staff had received relevant training, regular formal supervision and appraisals so that they were competent in their roles.

Is the service caring?

People's privacy and dignity was respected and their independence promoted. People told us that they were well cared for and that staff were helpful and supportive. We observed that there was a good interaction between staff members and people.

Is the service responsive?

People had regular one to one sessions with their keyworker to discuss any issues relating to their care and support plans. The care plans we reviewed demonstrated that people's needs had been assessed and met appropriately. People accessed local community facilities and staff helped and supported them with activities to promote their independent living.

Is the service well-led?

People expressed their satisfaction with the care and support they received. The organisation carried out an annual questionnaire survey for people who used the service, their relatives and the staff. However, a report for the home had not been produced. Regular audits had been carried out to ensure that people's needs were met and that they lived in a safe and comfortable environment.

People had a good choice of food and were supported with their weight management, although the required information to support them with their weight loss or gain had not been documented in full.

Medication was recorded as administered in accordance with people's prescriptions although one person had not been given their medication since moving in to the service; their required medication had been specified in their pre-assessment document.

We found that staffing arrangements at night were not sufficient to meet the needs of people who used the service. We also found that whilst staff had attended mandatory training, some additional training which would have assisted the staff to ensure people who used the service were safely cared for had not been provided.

Complaints had been managed in line with company policy.

We observed staff interacting with people in a way which was kind and promoted their well being. Staff were supportive of people's needs and engaged with them during the time we were there.

Staff at Dimensions Nicholas House told us that this was a 'nice place to work'. We were also told that people's privacy and dignity was respected and that staff always closed the doors when they're helping with personal care. We observed the home to be visibly clean on the day; all the people appeared to have had their personal care needs met.

We found that people's support plans were not all up to date and did not always reflect their current needs.