Archived: Memory House

Updated 1 June 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 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 the 16 and 17 April 2018 and was unannounced. The team consisted of one inspector on the 16 April 2018, and on 17 April 2018 an expert by experience accompanied the inspector. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Our expert by experience had experience of caring for older people and people living with dementia.

We used information the provider sent us in the ‘Provider Information Return’. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information that we hold about the service such as safeguarding information and notifications. Notifications are the events happening in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We used this information to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.

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 spoke with 11 people living at the service, six visiting relatives and friends, four members of staff, the person responsible for providing social activities, the deputy manager, the registered manager and the service’s regional manager. We reviewed four people’s care files and four staff recruitment and support records. We also looked at a sample of the service’s quality assurance systems, the registered provider’s arrangements for managing medication, staff training records, staff duty rotas and complaint and compliment records.

Updated 1 June 2018

The inspection was completed on the 16 and 17 April 2018 and was unannounced. At the time of this inspection there were 32 people living at Memory House.

Memory 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 care home accommodates up to 39 older people and people living with dementia in one adapted building.

Memory House is a large detached building situated in a quiet residential area in Leigh on Sea and close to all amenities. The premises is set out on two floors with each person using the service having their own individual bedroom and adequate communal facilities are available for people to make use of within the service.

At the last inspection on the 9 and 10 March 2017, the service was rated ‘Requires Improvement ’. No breaches of regulatory requirements were served. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions of ‘Safe’, ‘Effective’, ‘Responsive’ and ‘Well-Led’ to at least good. At this inspection, we found the service had improved their rating to ‘Good’.

A registered manager was 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.

The dining experience for people was not as positive as it should be and improvements were required to ensure people were appropriately supported by staff to eat their meal. Though newly appointed staff received an induction, improvements were needed to ensure a robust induction was in place for staff with no previous care experience. Improvements were also needed to ensure where people required their food and fluid intake to be monitored, records provided sufficient detail to determine if the person’s diet was satisfactory or not.

Quality assurance arrangements were in place and completed at regular intervals in line with the registered provider’s schedule of completion. The registered provider and the registered manager were able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of the importance of having good effective quality assurance processes in place. Feedback from people using the service, those acting on their behalf and staff were positive about the care and support provided.

People told us the service was a safe place to live and there were sufficient staff available to meet their care and support needs. Appropriate arrangements were in place to recruit staff safely. Although staff understood the risks and signs of potential abuse and the relevant safeguarding processes to follow, improvements were required to ensure all matters of concern were reported to the Care Quality Commission. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were appropriately assessed, managed and reviewed to ensure their safety.

Staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding and knowledge of people’s specific support needs to ensure theirs’ and others’ safety. Medicines were safely stored, recorded and administered in line with current guidance to ensure people received their prescribed medicines. This meant people received their prescribed medicines as they should and in a safe way.

Staff received opportunities for training and this ensured staff employed at the service had the right skills and competencies to meet people’s needs. Where training updates were required, the registered manager made arrangements to source this training as soon as possible. Staff felt supported and received appropriate formal supervision at regular intervals and an appraisal of their overall performance. Staff demonstrated a good understanding and awareness of how to treat people with respect, dignity and to maintain their independence.

Where people lacked capacity to make day-to-day decisions about their care and support, we saw that decisions had been made in their best interests. The registered manager was working with the Local Authority to make sure people’s legal rights were being protected. People who used the service and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support.

Care plans accurately reflected people’s care and support needs and people received support to have their social care needs met. Where people were at risk of poor nutrition or hydration, this was monitored and appropriate healthcare professionals sought for advice and interventions. People told us that their healthcare needs were well managed. Staff were friendly, kind and caring towards the people they supported and care provided met people’s individual care and support needs.

People and their relatives told us that if they had any concern they would discuss these with the management team or staff on duty. People were confident that their complaints or concerns were listened to, taken seriously and acted upon.