Archived: Blenheim House

Blenheim 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 home is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for adults for a maximum of 15 people. There were 14 people living at the home on the day of the inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People continued to feel safe living at the home and that staff supported them to maintain their safety. Staff told us about how they minimised the risk to people’s safety and that they would report any suspected abuse or the risk of abuse to the management team. People got the help needed with staff offering guidance or support with their care that reduced their risk of harm.

There were staff available to meet people’s needs or answer any requests for support in a timely way. Care staff had time to spend time socially with people or offering and encouraging activities.

People continued to receive their medicines from staff who managed their medicines in the right way. People also felt that if they needed extra pain relief or other medicines as needed these were provided. Staff wore protective gloves and aprons to reduce the risks of spreading infection.

People were involved in planning their care, which included end of life planning where required. People’s care plans were accurate and had up to date information about their current care needs.

People told us staff knew their care and support needs. Staff told us they understood the needs of people and their knowledge was supported by the training they were given. Staff knowledge reflected the needs of people who lived at the home. People told us staff acted on their wishes and their agreement had been sought before staff carried out any care or support.

People were supported to have 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. People who lack mental capacity to consent to arrangements for necessary care or treatment can only be deprived of their liberty when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. The procedures for this in care homes and hospitals are called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People told us they enjoyed their meals, had a choice of the foods they enjoyed and were supported to eat and drink enough to keep them healthy. People had access to other healthcare professionals that provided treatment, advice and guidance to support their health needs.

People told us they enjoyed spending time with staff who respected their privacy and dignity was maintained with staff support. People’s day to day preferences were listened to by staff and people’s choices and decisions were respected. Staff told us it was important to promote a person’s independence and ensure people had as much involvement as possible in their care and support.

People were aware of who they would make a complaint to if needed. People told us they were happy to talk through things with staff or the registered manager if they were not happy with the care.

People enjoyed living in the home which met their needs. The provider and staff demonstrated their commitment to care for people. They linked with care provider forums and ensured people had access to the local community.

The provider had a programme of audits in place to monitor the quality and safety of people’s care and support. The provider continually strived to make things work better so that people benefitted from a home that met their needs.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Blenheim House offers accommodation for up to 15 people with a wide range of care and support needs. This includes older people with dementia care needs. There were 15 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

People had their own rooms and the use of a number of communal areas, including a dining area, lounge and garden areas.

A registered manager was in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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. The registered manager oversaw five locations on the Moundsley Village site, and was supported by a unit manager at Blenheim House.

The registered manager, unit manager and staff team had developed ways of working with people so their safety needs taken into account and their individual preferences and interests were met. Risks to people's safety were understood and staff took action so people safety was promoted as their safety as their needs changed. Staff understood what actions to take if they had any concerns for people's safety or wellbeing. There was enough staff available to support people so their care needs would be met. This included people having opportunities to do things they enjoyed and go to places they liked with support from staff. People were supported to take their medicines so they would remain well.

Staff had the used their skills and knowledge when caring for people so people would enjoy a good quality of life. Staff worked people so their right to make decisions and their freedoms were protected. People were supported by staff to enjoy a range of drinks and food so they would remain well. People were supported to see health professionals so they would remain well.

We saw caring relationships had been built with the staff and people were given encouragement and reassurance when they needed it. Staff supported people so they were able to make choices about their daily care. People's need for privacy and independence was taken into account by staff in the way they cared for them.

People benefited from living in a home where staff understood people’s individual support and care needs and their individual preferences. Staff took action when people's needs changed and changed how they cared for them so their needs were met.

People had not needed to make any complaints about the service provided at the home for some time. People were confident staff would take action if complaints were raised and knew how to do this.

Staff were supported through training and discussions with their managers and knew what was expected of them. People and staff were comfortable to make suggestions for improving the care provided and their suggestions were acted upon. Regular checks were undertaken on the quality of the care by the registered manager, unit manager and provider and actions were taken to develop the home further.