Archived: Andrew Cohen House

Updated 8 March 2018

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.

This inspection took place on 4 and 5 January 2018 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors, a nurse who has experience of working with people with dementia and one 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, in this case dementia care.

As part of planning the inspection, we checked if the provider had sent us any notifications. These contain details of events and incidents the provider is required to notify us about by law, including unexpected deaths and injuries occurring to people receiving care. We also looked at any information that had been sent to us by the commissioners of the service and Healthwatch. We used this information to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection visit.

Before this inspection, we had not asked the provider to complete 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. Due to technical problems, a PIR was not available and we took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

We spoke with 15 people, 6 relatives and one health care professional. During the inspection, we spoke with the registered manager and deputy manager and 13 staff who worked at Andrew Cohen House. We also spoke with the trust director. 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 made informal observations throughout the days of the inspection. We looked at care records, including pathway tracking 6 people. We spent time reviewing records that included rotas, training and supervision lists, staff recruitment files, peoples care files and audits.

Updated 8 March 2018

The comprehensive inspection of this service took place on 4 and 5 January 2018. It was unannounced. At our last focussed inspection of this service we found it to be Requires Improvement in the key areas of Safe, Effective and Well Led, however there were no legal breaches of regulation at that time. Other key areas of Caring and Responsive were found to be Good.

Andrew Cohen House is a care home with nursing and can accommodate up to 59 people in one adapted building. The home specialises in providing care to people living with dementia in small separate units within the building. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

People were protected from potential abuse by staff that were trained and understood how to safeguard them. People had risks to their safety assessed and there were plans in place to reduce the risks, which staff understood and followed. There were sufficient staff that had been recruited safely to support people when they needed it. People received support to have their medicines as prescribed. There were systems in place to learn from incidents, or when things went wrong to avoid this happening again.

People had their needs assessed and were supported to meet them by trained well-supported staff. People had their nutrition and hydration needs met and had enjoyable mealtime experiences with lots of choice. The building was purpose built and designed to meet people's needs. People were supported to access health professionals to maintain their health and wellbeing. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People had good relationships with staff and were supported in a kind, caring and compassionate manner. People made choices about their care and support and were involved in decision making. People were supported in a way, which maintained their dignity, and staff were respectful.

People had their preferences met and staff understood people's needs.

There were opportunities for people to follow their interests and take part in a wide range of activities. People's communication needs were considered and they had support to follow their religious beliefs and cultural practices. People understood how to complain and complaints were responded to in line with the provider's policy. People had the opportunity to take part in discussions about their preferences for care and support at the end of their life.

A registered manager was in post and people, relatives and staff found they were accessible. People and their relatives had an opportunity to have say in how the home was run. The registered manager had checks in place to assess the quality of the service people received and ensure the management of the service was effective. The registered manager had a vision for the service and plans in place to make continual improvements.