The inspection took place on 12 and 13 April 2016 and was unannounced. The service was last inspected on 7 January 2014, when we found they were meeting the regulations. The registered manager had been in post since April 2013. 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.
The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to 43 older people, who may have dementia. Thirty-six people were living at the home at the time of our inspection.
People were at the heart of the service. The provider’s philosophy, vision and values were understood and shared across the staff team. Staff received training in the provider’s values and philosophy, which included, ‘play, make their day, be there and choose your attitude’. People were supported to maintain their purpose and pleasure in life. People’s right to lead a fulfilling life was enshrined in a charter of rights, which all staff understood and respected.
The provider was innovative and creative and constantly strived to improve the quality of people’s lives, by working in partnership with experts in the field of dementia care. The provider had researched and reflected on how an internationally recognised provider of excellence in dementia care provided care. They had re-modelled the home in accordance with current best practice principles, which included artefacts and different rooms designed to stimulate memories, provoke curiosity and to rest and relax.
The registered manager and staff participated in research projects aimed at improving the quality of care. Actions taken by the provider and planned improvements were focused on improving people’s quality of life, based on the research and experience of experts. People, their relatives and healthcare professionals were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the service, to ensure planned improvements focused on people’s experiences. The provider ensured people had the opportunity to share their views face-to-face, by telephone and by using the most up- to-date ‘on-line’ computer based methods.
People and relatives behaved as if the home were their own home. They maintained their preferred and familiar routines and habits, which made them content and relaxed. Staff took time to understand people’s life stories and supported and encouraged people to celebrate important personal and national events. People were supported take an active interest in the local community and to maintain their personal interests and hobbies.
The provider employed a team of exercise and activity co-ordinators who were dedicated to supporting people to make the most of each day. The group activity sessions were effective and the positive impact on people’s moods was visible. People and staff shared the moment of fun together, which developed trust and positive relationships. Healthcare professionals and external agencies commented on the rapport between people and staff and the ‘lovely’ feeling that their rapport created across the home.
People planned their own care, with the support of their relatives and staff, to ensure their care plans matched their individual needs, abilities and preferences, from their personal perspective. Care staff showed insight and understanding in caring for people, because they understood people’s individual motivations and responses.
Staff were attentive to people’s appetites, moods and behaviours and were proactive in implementing individual strategies to minimise people’s anxiety. Staff ensured people obtained advice and support from healthcare professionals to minimise the risks of poor health.
All the staff were involved in monitoring the quality of the service, which included regular checks of people’s care plans, medicines administration and staff’s practice. Accidents, incidents, falls and complaints were investigated and actions taken to minimise the risks of a re-occurrence. The provider shared their learning with all the homes in the group.
There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s physical and social needs. The registered manager checked staff’s suitability to deliver personal care during the recruitment process. The premises and equipment were regularly checked to ensure risks to people’s safety were minimised. People’s medicines were managed, stored in their own rooms and administered safely.
Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from harm and were encouraged and supported to raise any concerns. Staff understood the risks to people’s individual health and wellbeing and risks were clearly recorded in their care plans.
Staff received training that matched people’s needs effectively. Staff were encouraged to reflect on their practice and to develop their skills and knowledge, which improved people’s experience of care. Care co-ordinators were part of the duty management system, which meant there was a named manager available to respond to issues and to support staff, seven days a week.
The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). For people who were assessed as not having the capacity to make all of their own decisions, records showed that their advocates, families and healthcare professionals were involved in making decisions in their best interests.
Risks to people’s nutrition were minimised because people were offered meals that were suitable for their individual dietary needs and met their preferences. People were supported to eat and drink according to their needs, staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet.