Dene Place Care Home

Updated 28 November 2020

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 conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control. This inspection took place on 12 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 28 November 2020

Dene Place is a ‘care home’. People in care 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. Dene Place Care Home is registered to provide nursing and personal care for up to 30 people. There were 16 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

This inspection site visit took place on 13 September 2018 and was unannounced.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

At the last comprehensive inspection on 7 November 2017 and focused inspection on the 12 February 2018, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in relation to the deployment of staff, the delivery of safe care to people, activities available to people and the leadership and quality assurance at the service. At this inspection we found that this had improved.

There were appropriate levels of care staff to support people when they needed it. These were reviewed regularly dependant on the needs of people that lived at the service. Risks to people’s personal safety had been assessed and plans were in place to minimise these risks. Staff understood risks associated with people’s care. There were appropriate plans in place in the event of an emergency. Accidents and incidents were acted upon and steps taken to reduce the risks.

Steps were taken to review the care and the delivery with actions to make improvements. Methods they used included surveys, audits, resident and relative meetings and staff meetings. Where shortfalls were identified actions were taken to rectify this. People were supported to make a complaint if they needed to. Complaints were investigated and improvements made where needed.

People said that they felt safe. Staff ensured that people were protected against the risk of abuse and told us that they would not hesitate in reporting any concerns. Robust recruitment of staff took place before they started work. Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of infections.

People’s medicines were managed safely and appropriately by staff. People had access to pain relief when they needed. People’s nutrition and hydration were managed to ensure they received the most appropriate care. Health care professionals were involved with the care of people and people were supported to attend health care appointments. People’s needs were assessed fully before they started to receive care at the service.

Training and supervision were provided to staff that ensured that the most appropriate care was being provided to people. We saw through observations that staff were knowledgeable and effective in the care that they provided. Staff were effective in sharing information in relation to the care of people and worked in line with current guidance.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) is a legal framework about how decisions should be taken where people may lack capacity to do so for themselves. Staff had received training around the MCA and how they needed to put it into practice and staff were knowledgeable in this. There were people at the service that had the capacity to make decisions about their care and staff respected this. Where people were being restricted, applications were submitted to the Local Authority in line with the legal requirements.

Staff showed care and empathy towards people. It was clear that staff had good relationships with people and understood what was important to them. Staff showed patience, dignity and respect and people responded well to staff.

People received individualised care and were able to make choices around how they wanted their room to look and how they wanted their care to be delivered. People were supported to be independent and to make their own choices. Visitors were welcomed at the service.

Care plans were detailed and specific to each person. There was guidance for staff on how best to provide the support. Staff were aware of what care needed to be provided. People were supported to participate in activities that they enjoyed. Care plans were in place to people at the end of their lives. The environment suited the needs of people that lived at the service

People and staff were complimentary of the management and the support they received. Staff worked well as a team and felt supported and valued. Staff understood the values of the service. Staff worked with organisations outside of the service to improve delivery of care.

Services that provide health and social care to people are required to inform the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of important events that happen in the service. The registered manager had informed the CQC of significant events including significant incidents and safeguarding concerns.