Olivet

Updated 27 February 2021

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 provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC's response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 15 February 2021 and was announced.

Updated 27 February 2021

This unannounced, comprehensive inspection took place on the 03 October 2018 with a returned announced visit made on the 04 October 2018. Olivet provides accommodation and support for up to 68 adults with nursing and personal care needs. The home comprised three units, Garden House for residential care, Magnolia for nursing care and Cedars for those living with dementia. At the time of our inspection visit 62 people were living there.

At our last inspection in July 2017, we rated the service requires improvement under the key questions ‘is the service effective and well led’. At this inspection we found there had been improvements made to support a rating of good.

Olivet is registered as a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe. Staff understood how to protect people from risk of harm. People's risks were assessed, monitored and managed to ensure they remained safe. Processes were in place to keep people safe in the event of an emergency such as a fire. People were protected by safe recruitment procedures and sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people's support needs. People received their medicines as required. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to hygiene and infection control.

People received effective support from staff that had the skills required to support them safely. 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. People were encouraged to eat healthily. People had access to healthcare professionals when needed, in order to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Staff encouraged people's independence where practicably possible. People received a service that was caring and respected their privacy. People were supported by staff who knew them well.

People received a service that was responsive to their individual needs. Care plans were personalised and contained details about people's preferences and their routines. People were supported to pursue hobbies and activities that interested them and processes were in place to respond to any issues or complaints. Peoples’ faith was very important to them. This included their end of life (EOL) wishes which we saw were openly discussed between the person, family members and healthcare professionals. This meant that people’s EOL wishes were respected and fulfilled to the person’s individual preferences.

The service was well led, the registered manager understood their role and responsibilities and staff felt supported and listened to. People and staff were encouraged to give feedback and their views were acted on to enhance the quality of service provided to people. People and staff were complimentary about the leadership and management of the home and said the registered manager was friendly and approachable. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided to people and the provider worked in conjunction with other agencies to provide people with effective care.