Background to this inspection
Updated
12 February 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection team consisted of two inspectors 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.
Service and service type
Church View 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.
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.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed the information we held about the service and the service provider. We looked at notifications received from the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. This ensured we were addressing any areas of concern. We received feedback from the commissioners. We also reviewed the provider’s previous inspection reports. We used all of this information to plan our inspection. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We spoke with seven people and five relatives. We looked at three people’s care records and eight medicine administration records (MAR). During the inspection we spent time with people. We looked around the home and observed the way staff interacted with people. We spoke with the operations manager, registered manager, the deputy manager and nine staff which included, care staff, kitchen staff, activities coordinators and domestic staff. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the registered manager to validate evidence found. We received feedback from four social and health care professionals who regularly visited people who received care from the service.
Updated
12 February 2020
About the service
Church View is a care home providing personal and nursing care to 36 older people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 43 people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The service ensured arrangements for social activities met people’s individual needs and followed best practice guidance, so people could live as full a life as possible. The provider used a pool activity level (PAL) instrument to providing activity-based care for people with cognitive impairments, including dementia. The service had explored to find out what people had done in the past and evaluated whether it could accommodate activities.
The management team and staff ensured people received personalised care which had positive impact on their lives. Visiting professionals told us the service was focused on providing person-centred care and support and achieved excellent results. For example, one person had improved, and they were going home to live independently. Staff knew people well and quickly identified people’s changing needs.
The service worked closely with healthcare professionals and provided good end of life care. People experienced a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death. We saw feedback from relatives following end of life care was positive. There was a rapid response to people’s changing care needs and advice on care and support for people and staff at the times they needed. The home had established close links with a local hospice. Staff had the specific skills to understand and meet the needs of people and their families in relation to emotional support and the practical assistance they need at the end of the person’s life. Records showed staff had attended end of life care training. Staff told us they were supported by the management team with empathy and understanding.
People living at Church View told us they received safe care from skilled and knowledgeable staff. Staff knew how to identify and report any concerns. The provider had safe recruitment and selection processes in place.
Risks to people's safety and well-being were managed through a risk management process. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people's needs. Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to maintain good health and to meet their nutritional needs.
People told us staff were caring. This ethos consistency enabled people to receive good care from staff who knew them well. Staff did all they could to promote independency and we saw examples of such practices.
The home was well-led by a registered manager who was focusing on improving people’s care and developing staff skills. A lot of significant changes had been implemented to support effective team working and improve people’s outcomes. The service had a clear management and staffing structure in place and staff worked well as a team. The provider had quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 15 January 2019).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk