Archived: Sycamore House Care Home

Updated 12 January 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 provider is 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.

This inspection took place on 11 December 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was completed by an adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also looked at the notifications we received from the service and reviewed all the intelligence CQC held to help inform us about the level of risk for this service. We reviewed all of this information to help us to make a judgement about the service.

During the inspection we used the Short Observational Framework Tool for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI allows us to spend time observing what is happening in the service and helps us to record how people spend their time and if they have positive experiences. We observed staff interacting with people who used the service and the level of support provided to people throughout the day, including meal times.

During our inspection we spoke with five people who used the service and three visiting relatives. We also spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager, five members of care staff, the handyman, two cooks and a visiting professional.

We looked at five people’s care plans along with the associated risk assessments and their Medicines Administration Records (MARs). We also looked at how the service used the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure that when people were assessed as lacking capacity to make informed decisions themselves or when they were deprived of their liberty, actions were taken in their best interest.

We looked at a selection of documentation in relation to the management and running of the service. This included quality assurance information policies and procedures, stakeholder surveys, recruitment information, staff training records and records of maintenance carried out on equipment and facilities. We also completed a tour of the premises to check infection control practices.

Updated 12 January 2016

Sycamore House is situated in Hull. It is a single storey building; it is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide care and accommodation for a maximum of 36 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The service has 34 bedrooms for single occupancy and one shared bedroom. There is a range of communal rooms throughout the service.

This inspection was undertaken on 11 December 2015, and was unannounced. The service was last inspected on 26 August 2014 and found to be compliant with all of the regulations that we assessed at that time.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. 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.

Staff told us and records confirmed safeguarding training had been completed. Staff told us they felt confident the registered manager would investigate any concerns they raised. Risk assessments were in place to reduce and mitigate the known risks to people who used the service. People were supported by suitable numbers of staff. Medicines were managed safely and administered by trained staff.

Staff had completed a range of training that enabled them to meet people’s assessed needs effectively. Staff received support and mentorship from the registered manager. Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 when there were concerns people lacked capacity and important decisions needed to be made. The registered manager understood their responsibilities in relation to the deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS). People ate a balanced and varied diet of their choosing; their nutritional needs were assessed and monitored. Advice from relevant health care professionals was requested and their guidance was recorded as required.

People were supported by attentive and caring staff that understood their preferences for how care and support was to be delivered. Staff knew the people they supported, their likes, dislikes, hobbies and interests and provided them with person centred care. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

People were involved in the planning of their care and records showed that reviews took place periodically. We saw that when possible people or an appointed person had signed to show their agreement with the contents of their care plans. People were encouraged to follow their interest and participate in activities. A complaints policy was in place, we saw when complaints were received they were responded to in line with this.

A quality assurance system was in place that consisted of audits, checks and feedback from people who used the service. When shortfalls were identified action was taken to improve the service as required. The registered manager was a constant presence within the service and understood the requirement to report notifiable incidents to the Care Quality Commission.