Archived: Truscott Manor Care Home

We found the following examples of good practice.

Staff had considered how to safely manage visits to people. There was a designated area inside the home used for family and friends visiting residents when these visits had to take place inside rather than being in the garden. This area could be accessed from outside of the service directly so that visitors did not have to walk through the main building.

Staff had been particularly considerate when encouraging people to be tested for Covid-19. This included finding the best time of day for the person as well as their preferred member of staff to carry out the tests. Individual risk assessments specific to the risks of Covid-19 were in place for all members of staff. These took into account individual characteristics which may have made staff more at risk of Covid-19.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Truscott Manor Care Home is a nursing home. People in nursing homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Truscott Manor Care Home is a large detached property set within extensive grounds and is registered to provide care, nursing and respite for up to 39 older people. Accommodation is provided over two floors, with a passenger lift providing access between floors. On the day of our inspection 34 people were using the service.

At the last inspection on 9 November 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good

People and relatives told us they felt the service was safe. One person told us "I feel safe they come if I need anything, they all know what I need help with". People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

The provider had arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.

Staff considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. 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. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People and their relatives felt staff were skilled to meet the needs of people and provide effective care. One person told us “Staff seem to know what they are doing, they all do a very good job. No complaints at all really”. Another person said “They are great and skilled in what they do. Very helpful”.

Staff supported people to eat and drink and they were given time to eat at their own pace. People’s nutritional needs were met and people reported that they had a good choice of food and drink. One relative told us “My relative loves the food, there is always drinks coming round and they handle her very kindly”.

Staff felt fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. Staff spoke positively about training and supervisions they received from the management and provider and commented on how they found they could ask questions freely. One member of staff told us “I had an induction, shadowed staff and did lots of learning. I’m also doing the care certificate and a diploma in health and social care has been discussed for me”.

Feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People and relatives also said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed and were told any minor issue was dealt with straight away.

People’s individual needs continued to be assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.

Quality assurance audits completed by the registered manager and provider were embedded to ensure a good level of quality was maintained. We saw audit activity for areas such as infection control, care planning and training.

People, staff and relatives found the management team approachable and professional. On person told us “The nurse managers are very good and make sure it all runs well. I see them daily and always make sure I am ok”. A member of staff said “The manager and deputy manager have been here a long time which is great. There is a solid base and they know the residents well and are approachable people, they really care”.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

People said they were happy in the home and satisfied with their care and treatment. One person said 'The care has been wonderful and I can't praise them enough'. A relative told us 'The atmosphere is warm and friendly and they really do care. They've taken away my worries totally'.

We saw that staff were friendly and courteous and people told us they were listened to and made choices about their care. One person said 'The staff are polite, treat me with respect and I was properly involved in decisions about my care'.

People said they were well cared for and felt safe. We saw they had individualised care records and risk assessments in place which were reviewed regularly and helped staff understand and meet their needs. One relative said 'If it wasn't for their excellent care my relative wouldn't be here today'.

The medication system was robust and medicines were administered safely and as prescribed.

The recruitment and selection process ensured that all staff had the appropriate checks before starting work and undertook relevant training.

There was an effective complaints system in place. People were supported to express their comments and complaints and all complaints were fully investigated and action taken if required.

There was a relaxed and comfortable atmosphere within the home and the staff we spoke to understood how to support people, assisted them to make choices and maintain as much independence as possible. A member of staff told us "staff work as a team," another said "when I came here everyone helped me."

In order to protect the people who used the service, we saw that the home carried out a rigorous staff recruitment process. We saw that staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and preferences, were observed to treat people as individuals and delivered care in a personalised way.

There were processes in place to monitor the quality of service being provided and we saw that people were involved through questionnaires, reviews and one to one discussions.

Relatives we spoke to told us they were very happy with the standard of care. One person told us "even cleaners speak with residents, a really good team." Another told us their relative "looks 160% to when they first came in" and "no complaints about this place at all."

Another professional who was visiting told us "support and communication is very good here."