The Staveley Centre

Updated 26 February 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the 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.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by one inspector, an assistant inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Their area of expertise was dementia care.

Service and service type:

The Staveley Centre is 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. The service accommodates up to 32 people in one purpose built building.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: This inspection was unannounced.

The inspection site visit activity started on 15 January 2019 and ended on the 15 January 2019.

What we did:

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. The provider returned the PIR and we took this into account when we made judgements in this report. We reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We also considered the last inspection report and information that had been sent to us by other agencies. We also contacted commissioners who had a contract with the service.

During the inspection, we spoke with eight people using the service and three of their relatives. We observed the care for two people living with dementia. We 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. We also had discussions with eight staff members that included the area and deputy manager, a physiotherapist, approved nurse practitioner and a student social worker. In addition, we had discussions with two house keepers, and five care and support workers.

We looked at the care and medication records of four people who used the service, we undertook a tour of the premises and observed information on display around the service such as information about safeguarding and how to make a complaint. We also examined records in relation to the management of the service such as staff recruitment files, quality assurance checks, staff training and supervision records, safeguarding information and accidents and incident information

Updated 26 February 2019

About the service:

The Staveley Centre is situated in Staveley near Chesterfield and provides accommodation and personal care for up to 32 older people, including those living with dementia. The service has 20 long-term residential care beds and four respite beds. In addition, the service has eight designated beds for intermediate and

re-ablement services. There is an on-site physiotherapist and an occupational therapist to support and aid rehabilitation following illness and hospital care, prior to being discharged home. At the time of our inspection, 28 people were using the service and three were in hospital.

What life is like for people using this service:

People continued to receive safe care. Staff had been provided with safeguarding training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. There were detailed risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety. Staffing numbers were sufficient to keep people safe and the registered provider followed thorough recruitment procedures to ensure staff employed were suitable for their role. People’s medicines were managed safely and in line with best practice guidelines. Systems were in place to ensure that people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People’s needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with their preferences. Staff received an induction process when they first commenced work at the service and received on-going training to ensure they could provide care based on current practice when supporting people. People received enough to eat and drink, however they were not able to be involved in menu choices. Staff supported people to access a variety of healthcare services to meet their health and medical needs. 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 principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind and caring. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted. People had developed positive relationships with staff who had a good understanding of their needs and preferences.

People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and/or their relative where required. Most people were able to take part in activities that met their social needs, however some people expressed dissatisfaction with the activities available and felt they were not appropriate for them. Staff promoted and respected people's cultural diversity and lifestyle choices. Care plans were personalised and provided staff with guidance about how to support people and respect their wishes. Information was made available in accessible formats to help people understand the care and support agreed.

The service continued to be well managed. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. Staff felt well-supported and received supervision that gave them an opportunity to share ideas, and exchange information. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.

More information is in Detailed Findings below

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 29 January 2016)

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.