Archived: Granby Rose SDU

Updated 7 April 2015

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, 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 23 October 2014 and was unannounced.

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors, a specialist professional advisor with expertise in dementia care 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.

During our inspection we carried out observations of staff interacting with people and included two structured observations using the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who were not able to talk with us.

Before the inspection, the provider completed 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. The PIR was reviewed along with other the information we held about the service and the service provider to assist in the planning of the inspection. We had received no concerns since the previous inspection carried out on 23 October 2014. We contacted the local authority contracting and commissioning teams who report no concerns about the service provided.

During the inspection visit we reviewed four people’s care records, three staff recruitment files, records required for the management of the home such as audits, minutes from meetings and satisfaction surveys, medication storage and administration. We also spoke to the registered manager and the regional manager; fourteen members of staff including, registered nurses, care staff, activities organiser and kitchen staff. We also spoke to two visiting health professionals; two people who lived at the service and two relatives.

Updated 7 April 2015

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 23 October 2014. Granby Rose SFU provides accommodation and nursing care for up to 25 people living with dementia who have residential or nursing care needs. There were 23 people living at the home when we visited.

During the visit we spoke with the registered manager. 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. We also spoke with fourteen members of staff including, registered nurses, care staff, activities organiser and kitchen staff. We also spoke with staff attending the service to carry out quality assurance checks for the provider’s accredited dementia care scheme (PEARL). We also spoke to two visiting professionals.

The home met all the regulations we inspected during our last inspection which was carried out on 23 October 2014.

The service was safe. Staff recruitment procedures meant appropriate checks were carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staff had received training with regard to safeguarding adults and were able to demonstrate they understood the action to take if they suspected abuse. Staff had received training to equip them for their role; this including mandatory health and safety training. We saw staff showed care, compassion and respect for people. The experiential training they received contributed towards this. The service provided meaningful activities and occupation which reflected people’s interests and choices. The relationships staff had developed with people helped them be imaginative in the way they engaged people in activities.

The service was well led. Staff people using the service and their relatives and representatives expressed confidence in the manager abilities to provide good quality care. The service was responsive to any comments or complaints they received in making the necessary improvements where shortfalls were identified and there were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service.