Archived: Belvoir Home Care Home

Updated 20 August 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 registered persons were 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.

Before the inspection we examined the information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since the last inspection. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about.

We visited the service on 21 July 2016. The inspection was unannounced and the inspection team consisted of a single inspector.

During the inspection we spoke with seven people who lived in the service. We also spoke with three care workers, two senior care workers, the chef, the hospitality manager/activity coordinator and the registered manager. We observed care being provided in communal areas and we also examined records that related to how the service was managed including staffing, training and quality assurance.

We also 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.

After the inspection visit we spoke by telephone with three relatives. We did this so that they could tell us their views about how well the service was meeting their family members’ needs and wishes.

Updated 20 August 2016

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 21 July 2016.

Belvoir Home Care Home can provide accommodation and personal care for 20 older people and people who live with dementia. There were 18 people living in the service at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People were not suitably protected from the risk of acquiring avoidable infections. Staff knew how to respond to any concerns that might arise so that people were kept safe from abuse including financial mistreatment. People had been helped to avoid the risk of accidents and medicines were managed safely. There were enough staff on duty to care for people and background checks had been completed before new staff were appointed.

Parts of the accommodation were not adapted and decorated to meet people’s needs. Staff had received training and guidance to support them to care for people in the right way. People had been assisted to eat and drink enough and they had been supported to receive all of the healthcare assistance they needed.

Staff had ensured that people’s rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how registered persons apply the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and to report on what we find. These safeguards protect people when they are not able to make decisions for themselves and it is necessary to deprive them of their liberty in order to keep them safe. Two people living in the service were being deprived of their liberty and the registered manager had taken the necessary steps to ensure that their legal rights were protected.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff recognised people’s right to privacy, promoted their dignity and respected confidential information.

People had been consulted about the care they wanted to receive and they had been given all of the assistance they needed. This included people who lived with dementia and who could become distressed. People were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests and there was a system for resolving complaints.

Quality checks had been completed to ensure that people received the facilities and services they needed. Good team work was promoted and staff were supported to speak out if they had any concerns because the service was run in an open and inclusive way. People had benefited from staff acting upon good practice guidance.