Archived: Sabrina House

Updated 7 June 2019

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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, 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 visit was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type:

Sabrina House 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:

We gave the service 1 days’ notice of the inspection site visit because the registered manager oversaw two services and we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available to support us with the inspection.

What we did:

We reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and notifications submitted by the provider related to incidents, accidents, health and safety and safeguarding concerns which affect the health and wellbeing of people who lived at the home. We also spoke with Shrewsbury local authority contracts and commissioning team and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. This allowed us to gain information related to the quality and safety of the service being provided.

Providers are required to send us key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We reviewed the information submitted by the provider to plan and guide our inspection. We used our planning tool to collate and analyse this information to help us plan our inspection visit.

During the inspection we spoke with four people, four relatives and five health and social care professionals who had input into the home. We spoke with three members of care staff, the cook, the deputy manager and the registered manager.

To gather information, we looked at a variety of records. This included care records related to four people who lived at the home. We also looked at other information related to the management of the service. We did this to ensure the registered manager had oversight on the home and to ensure the service could be appropriately managed.

After the inspection we continued to speak with the registered manager to corroborate our findings.

Updated 7 June 2019

About the service:

Sabrina House is a residential care home that is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to 14 people. At the time of our inspection 14 people were receiving regulated activity at Sabrina House.

People’s experience of using this service:

People told us they felt safe living at Sabrina House. We saw systems and processes continued to be implemented to keep people safe. Although systems were implemented, we noted new arrangements for the safe management of medicines had been recently implemented at the home. We found good practice guidelines were not always followed. We have made a recommendation about this.

We were repeatedly told by health and social care professionals and relatives that care was provided in a person-centred way which enabled people to experience very positive outcomes. Staff were committed to and worked innovatively to promote health and well-being. They embraced good practice guidance and training to enable them to deliver person-centred support. The service had recently been presented with the Creative Inspiration Musical Care Home 2018 award at a Creative Health Conference in recognition of the work completed by staff to increase well-being through music.

Contact with community resources and support networks were encouraged and sustained. The service understood the importance of combatting isolation and encouraged people to develop and maintain relationships. The home was an active part of the community, having links with nearby schools and colleges. One child who had been involved in some work with people who lived at the home had described the experience as, “life-changing”.

People, relatives and health and social care professionals told us staff were kind and caring and often exceeded expectations. The service understood the importance of protecting people’s human rights; dignity, independence and privacy was always considered and promoted.

People’s received timely support to ensure their health care needs were met. We received repeated praise from relatives and health and social care professionals. They said people’s health had improved because of effective care being provided at the home.

People told us they were happy with the quality and choice of food provided at the home. They said they were consulted with and personal preferences were taken into consideration.

Consent was recorded in people’s care files and relevant deprivation of liberty applications had been submitted when people were being deprived of their liberty. 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.

Everyone we spoke with repeatedly told us the home was well-led. Our observations showed this was the case. The management team and staff had clear roles and responsibilities and were committed to ensuring the service was high performing. Regular audits of the service took place to ensure care was safe, effective and in line with regulation.

Managers and staff had a clear vision of what was required of a quality service and ensured this was maintained. Feedback was continuously gained from all parties to develop and improve the service.

Staff told us they were adequately supported by the management team and said training was good. They repeatedly said morale was good and all staff who worked at the home genuinely cared.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated good (published 25 October 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

The next scheduled inspection will be in keeping with the overall rating. We will continue to monitor information we receive from and about the service. We may inspect sooner if we receive concerning information about the service.